THEOLOGIA VETERUM: OR THE SUM OF Christian Theology, Positive, Polemical, and Philological, CONTAINED IN THE Apostles CREED, Or reducible to it: According to the tendries of the Ancients both GREEKS and LATINS.  
IN THREE BOOKS.  
By PETER HEYLYN, D. in D.  JER. 6.16. 
Stand in the ways and see, and ask for the OLD PATHS, where is the good way, and walk therein, and you shall find rest for your souls.  VINCENT. LIRIN. Cap. 3. 
In ipsa item Catholica Ecclesia magnopere curandum est, ut id teneamus, quod UBIQUE, quod SEMPER, quod AB OMNIBUS creditum est.  
LONDON, Printed by E. Cotes for Henry Seile, over against St. Dunstan's Church in Fleetstreet, M. DC. LIV.   

To the Right Honourable the LORD marquis of HARTFORD.  
IT may seem strange unto your Lordship to see a name subscribed to this Dedication, which neither hath an Interest in your Noble and illustrious Family, nor any relations to your Person. But when I have acquainted you with the reasons of it, I hope those reasons will not only justify, but endear my Confidence. My large Cosmography having been Dedicated in the first Delineations and Essay thereof, to one of the greatest Princes in the Christian world; could not descend, with any Fitness, to a lower Patronage, after so many Additions, and so great Improvements. And for such other Books of mine as have seen the light, they were in justice and congruity, to be Inscribed to him alone, or to some of His, by whose Appointment they were written, and from whose service I was fain to borrow the greatest part of the time which I spent about them. But being now (unhappily) at my own disposing, and left unto the liberty of presenting the ensuing work, as my own Genius should direct me; I look upon your Lordship as a Person fitted with the best Capacities to receive this Present at my hands. The Eminent zeal wherewith your Lordship stood so firmly, for the established Doctrines and Devotions of the Church of England, when there appeared so great a readiness in too-many others to give them up as an Oblation or Peace-offering for their own security; in the first place, Entitleth you to the best performances in which the Orthodoxies of that Church and the Conformity thereof, to the ancient patterns, are declared and vindicated. To this as Seconds, may come in, your Lordship's Interest in that University where I had my breeding, and more particularly in that College, whereof I had the happiness to be once a Member; your studiousness in the ways of learning; the fair esteem you hold of those which pretend unto it; and the Encouragements you have given to the advancement of good letters, in forwarding with a bountiful and liberal hand the new Impression of the holy Bible in so many Languages; A work of such transcendent profit, and so many advantages above all others of that kind, as will not only redound to the honour of the Undertakers, but to the glory of the Furtherers and Promoters of it.  
These are the motives which on your Lordship's part have prompted me to this Dedication; and there are reasons for it on my own part also. Your Lordship cannot but remember what great cries were made At, and before the beginning of the late long Parliament, concerning a design to bring in Popery; the Bishops generally defamed as the chief Contrivers; the regular and established Clergy (my self as much if not more, than any of my rank and quality) traduced in public Pamphlets as subsurvient Instruments. And this was unicum eorum crimen qui crimine vacabant, in the words of Tacitus; the only Crimination laid upon those men, who hitherto have been convicted of no crime at all How wrongfully accused even in that particular, time which brings all things unto light, hath now clearly evidenced. For which is there of all the Bishops, how few of all the Sequestered and exauctorated Clergy, who notwithstanding all the provocations of want and scorn (greater then which were never laid on generous and ingenuous Spirits) have fallen off to Popery? So few in all (to the Eternal honour of both Orders be it spoken here) that were the reckoning or account to be made in Greek, it hardly would amount to a plural number. And for myself, how free I am, and have been always, from any Inclinations of that kind; in my Epistle to the Reader I have shown at large, and manifested more particularly in this present work. It had been else too great a folly (or a frenzy rather) to present any thing of mine to your Lordship's sight, of whose sincerity in the true Protestant Religion here by Law established, neither the jealousy nor malice of these last and worst times, hath raised any suspicion. And this I hope will be a full acquitment to me from all future clamours; for where a Person of such eminent and known Integrity makes good the Entrance, who dares suspect that any thing Popish or Profane, is either harborred in the work, or the Author of it? And if I gain this point, I have gained my purpose.  
These are (my Lord) the principal Impulsions which have put me upon this Adventure. And these I hope will be of so great prevalency with your Lordship also, as to procure a favourable Entertainment to the following work; that others may afford it the like fair Reception, when they shall find it Owned and Countenanced by your Lordship's name. Which honour if your Lordship shall vouchsafe unto It, the work shall have a sublunary Immortality beyond the Author; who whatsoever he is now, or shall be hereafter, is and shall be at all times, and on all occasions, redevable to your Lordship for so great a favour, as best becomes  
My LORD Your Lordship's most devoted And Most humble Servant Peter Heylyn. Lacy's Court in Abingdon; Iune●. 1654.   

TO THE READER.  
AND now Reader I am come to thee, who mayest perhaps wonder (and I cannot blame thee) to see me so soon again in Print, and that too in a Volume of so large a bulk. 'Tis like enough thou mayest conceive me guilty of that vanity, which a devout Author finds in some sort of men who desire knowledge only that they may be known; possibly of that vanity of vanities which the Wiseman speaks of, consisting in the writing of many books, 
Eccl. 12.12.  of which there was no end to be expected as he there informs us. And if this vanity were so strong in the time of Solomon, when the art of Writing was not vulgar, the art of Printing not invented, and that there wanted many helps which we now enjoy; it cannot be but that the humour must be more predominant in these latter days, wherein there are so many advantages for publishing our own conceptions to the view of others, as were not granted unto those of the elder ages. And we may say more truly than the Poet did, (by how much more we have those helps and opportunities which they had not then) Scriptorum plus est hodie quam muscarum olim cum caletur maxim, 
Plautus.  that greater are the swarms of writers then of flies in Summer: And here I look it should be said that in those things wherein I thus judge others, 
Rom. 2.1.  I condemn myself in doing the same things which I judge them for; and so am rendered inexcusable for so great a folly. And though it cannot be denied, but that I have been as great a Scribbler, as almost any other of my age and time: yet thus much I must say in my own defence, that except the first Essay and draught of my Geography, digested for my private pleasure, and Printed probably out of ambition and vain glory; I never published any thing with or without my mane subscribed unto it, but what was either by the strong hand of importunity extorted from me; or else imposed by the appointment and command of the noblest power under which I lived. Had I been troubled as some are, with an itch of Printing, or carried on by a desire of being in action; I could have offered to thy view some Pieces long before this time (and those, it may be, not unworthy of thy consideration) which hitherto I have kept by me, and possibly shall do so still, until they may be found subsequent to the public peace. For that there is a time to keep silence, 
Eccl. 4.7.  as well as times for men to speak, is as Canonical a line for a man to walk by (in my poor opinion) as to be instant in season, and out of season, is esteemed by others.  
But the truth is, I never voluntarily engaged myself in any of those public quarrels, by which the unity and order of the Church of England hath been so miserably distracted in these latter times. Nor have I ever loved to run before, or against Authority; but always took the just counsels and commands thereof for my ground and warrant: which when I had received, I could not think that there was any thing left on my part but obsequii gloria, 
Tacit. Ann.  the honour of a cheerful and free obedience. And in this part of my obedience it was my lot to be most commonly employed in the Puritan controversies: in managing whereof although I used all Equanimity and temper which reasonably could be expected (the argument and persons against whom I writ being well considered); yet I did thereby so exasperate that prevailing party, that I became the greatest object of their spleen and fury. Hardly a libel in those times, which exercised the patience of the State for so long together, in which my reputation was not blasted, my good name traduced, my Religion questioned; and whether I would or not I must be a Papist, or at the least an Under-factor for the Church of Rome. But the best was, I had the honour of good Company, which made the burden pleasing to me: not only the Bishops generally, but some Particulars amongst them of most eminent note, being traduced in the same Pasquil's for carrying on a design to bring in Popery; the King himself given out (witness the Popish royal Favourite, amongst other Pamplets) to be that way biased. And if they call the Master of the house by the name of Belzebub, the servants must not look to find better language. And though I took all honest and ingenuous courses to wipe off this stain, yet when the calumny once was up, necesse est ut aliquid haereat, it was impossible for me (in a manner) so to purge myself, as not to suffer under the injustice of the imputation. Concerning which I shall make bold to tell thee a remarkable passage, which is briefly this: It was about the time that my Lord of Canterbury had published his learned and laborious work against Fisher the jesuit, when I had preached some Sermons before the King upon the Parable of the Tares (which Parable I had chosen for the constant argument of my Sermons intended for the Court): of which some moderate and judicious men were pleased to say, that in those Sermons I had pulled up Popery by the very roots, and subverted the foundations of it: to which it was replied by some of those bitter spirits (whether with more uncharitableness or imprudent zeal, it is hard to say) that the Archbishop might Print, and Dr. Heylyn might Preach what they would against Popery, but they should never believe them to be any thing the l●sse Papists for all that. A censure of a very strange nature, and so little savouring of Christianity, that I believe it is not easy to be parralleled in the worst of times. But from the envy, hatred, malice, and uncharitableness of such kind of men, no less then from plague, pestilence, and famine, good Lord deliver us.  
I could add much more not much short of this, did I love to rub up these old sores, as indeed I do not: the clamour not being made less, if it went not higher in the sitting of the late long Parliament; though no complaint or information was made against me; or if it were, was thought considerable enough to be enquired into, or took notice of. Nor indeed had I said thus much but in compliance to the grave counsel of St. Hierome, whose saying it was, In suspicion hareseos se nolle quenquam fore patientem; that for a man to keep silence when accused of Heresy, was a selfe-conviction. And yet I cannot choose but note the great and unprofitable pains, which hath been taken by the Author of that Voluminous nothing, entitled Canterbury's Doom, to find me guilty of some points of supposed Popery: only because in some particulars not determined by the Church of England, I had adhered unto the words and tendries of the Ancient Fathers; or bound myself in matters publicly resolved on, to vindicate this Church to her genuine tenants. And to say truth, the least endeavour of this kind was cause enough for any clamour or reproaches which the tongues and pens of those bitter men could impose on them who did not stand as strongly in defence of Outlandish fancies, as of the true and natural doctrines of the Church their mother. Witness the fearful outcry made against B. Bilson for preaching otherwise of Christ's descending into hell; and the great hubbub raised against Peter Baro for writing otherwise in the points of Predestination, than had been taught by some of the Genevian Doctors; though neither the one had Preached, nor the other Printed, but what was consonant to the Doctrine of approved Antiquity, and to the true intent and meaning of the book of Articles here by Law established. Private opinions, especially if countenanced by some eminent name, were looked on as the public Resolutions of the Anglican Church, and the poor Church condemned for teaching those opinions, which by the artifice of some men had been fastened on her. So that it was not without some ground that the Archbishop of Spalleto being gone from hence, did upbraid this Church in his Consilium redeundi, for taking into her confession (which he acknowledges of its self to be sound and profitable) multa Calvini & Lutheri dogmata, many strange Doctrines broached by Luther, and held forth by Calvin. To which when Dr. Crackanthorp was commanded to make an Answer, he thought it neither safe nor seasonable to deny the charge, or plead not guilty to the bill: and therefore though he called his book Defensio Ecclesiae Anglicanae, yet he chose rather to defend those Dogmata which had been charged upon this Church in the Bishop's Pamphlet; then to assert this Church to her genuine Doctrines. They that went otherwise to work were like to speed no better in it, or otherwise requited for their honest zeal, then to be presently exposed to the public envy, and made the common subject of reproach and danger. So that I must needs look upon it as a bold attempt (though a most necessary piece of service) as the times than were, in B. Montague of Norwich in his answer to the Popish Gagger and the two Appellants to lay the saddle on the right horse, as the saying is, I mean to sever or discriminate the opinions of particular men from the received and authorized Doctrines of the Church of England; to leave the one to be maintained by their private fautors, and only to defend and maintain the other. And certainly had he not been a man of a mighty spirit, and one that easily could contemn the cries and clamours which were raised against him for so doing, he could not but have sunk remedilessly under the burden of disgrace, and the fears of ruin, which that performance drew upon him. To such an absolute authority were the names and writings of some men advanced by their diligent followers, that not to yield obedience to their Ipse dixits, was a crime unpardonable.  
It is true, King james observed the inconvenience, and prescribed a remedy, sending instructions to the Universities bearing date jan. 18. Ann. 1616. (which was eight years or thereabout, before the coming out of the Bishop's Gag) wherein it was directed amongst other things, that young students in Divinity should be excited to study such books as were most agreeable in doctrine and discipline too the Church of England, and to bestow their time in the Fathers and Counsels, Schoolmen, Histories and Controversies, and not to insist to long upon Compendiums and Abbreviators, making them the grounds of their study. And I conceive that from that time forwards the names and reputations of some leading men of the foreign Churches, which till then carried all before them, did begin to lessen: Divines growing every day more willing to free themselves from that servitude and Vassalage, to which the authority of those names had enslaved their judgements: But so, that no man had the courage to make such a general assault against the late received opinions as the Bishop did; though many when the ice was broken, followed gladly after him. About those times it was, that I began my studies in Divinity, and thought no course so proper and expedient for me, as the way commended by King james, and opened at the charges of B. Montague, though not then a Bishop. For though I had a good respect both to the memory of Luther, and the name of Calvin; as those whose writings had awakened all these parts of Europe out of the ignorance and superstition under which they suffered; yet I always took them to be men: Men as obnoxious unto error, as subject unto humane frailty, and as indulgent too to their own opinions, as any others whatsoever. The little knowledge I had gained in the course of Stories, had preacquainted me with the fiery spirit of the one, and the busy humour of the other: thought thereupon unfit by Archbishop Cranmer, and others the chief agents in the reformation of this Church, to be employed as instruments in that weighty business. Nor was I ignorant how much they differed from us in their Doctrinals and forms of Government. And I was apt enough to think, that they were no fit guides to direct my judgement, in order to the Discipline and Doctrine of the Church of England; to the establishing whereof they were held unuseful: and who both by their practices, and positions had declared themselves to be friends to neither. Yet give me leave to say withal, that I was never master of so little manners, as to speak reproachfully of either; or to detract from those just honours which they had acquired: though it hath pleased the nameless Author of the reply to my Lord of Canterbury's▪ Book against Fisher the jesuit, to tax me for giving unto Calvin in a book licenced by authority the opprobrious name of schismatical Heretic. 
Pag. 350.  Had he told either the parties name by whom it was licenced, or named the Book itself in which those ill words escaped me; I must have been necessitated to disprove, or confess the action. But being as it is, a bare denial is enough for a groundless slander. And so I leave my nameless Author (a Scot as I have been informed) with these words of Cicero, Quid minus est non dico Oratoris sed hominis, quam id objicere Adversario, quod si ille verbo negabit, longius progredi non possis.  
Pardon me Reader I beseech thee, for laying my naked soul before thee, for taking this present opportunity to acquit myself from those imputations which the uncharitableness of some men had aspersed me with. I have long suffered under the reproaches of the public Pamphleteers; not only charged with Popery and Heterodoxies in the point of faith, but also (as thou seest) with incivilities in point of manners; and I was much disquieted and perplexed in mind till I had given the world in thee, a verbal satisfaction at the least to these verbal Calumnies. How far I am really free from these criminations, I hope this following work will show thee. So will the Sermons on the Tears, preached in a time when the inclinations unto Popery were thought (but falsely thought) to be most predominant both in Court and Clergy; if ever I shall be persuaded to present them to the open view. In the mean time take here such testimonies both of my Orthodoxy and Candour, as this work affords thee. In which I have willingly pretermitted no just occasion of vindicating the Ancient and Apostolical Religion, established and maintained in the Church of England, against Opponents of all sorts; without respect to private persons, or particular Churches. And as old Pacian used to say, Christianus mihi nomen est, 
Pacian in Biblioth. Patr.  Catholicus cognomen; so I desire it may be also said of me, that Christian is my name, and Catholic my surname. A Catholic in that sense I am, and shall desire by God's grace to be always such a true English Catholic. And English Catholic I am sure is as good in Grammar, and far more proper in the right meaning of the word, then that of Roman Catholic is, or can be possibly, in any of the Popish party. And as an English Catholic I have kept myself unto the Doctrines, Rites, and forms of Government established in the Church of England, as it was constituted and confirmed by the best Authority which the Laws could give it, when I began to set myself to this employment, and had brought it in ● manner to a full conclusion. And though some alterations have since happened in the face of this Church, and those so great, as make no small matter of astonishment to the Christian world, yet being there is no establishment of any other Doctrine, Discipline, or new form of Government, and that God knows how soon the prudence of this State may think it fitting (if not necessary) to revive the old; I look upon it now as in the same condition and constitution in which it shined and flourished with the greatest beauty, that any National Church in Christendom could justly boast of. In all such points (which come within the compass of this discourse) wherein the Church hath positively declared her judgement, I keep myself to her determinations and decisions, according to the literal sense and Grammatical meaning of the words (as was required in the Declaration to the book of Articles) not putting my own sense upon them, nor drawing them aside to propagate and defend any foreign Doctrines, by what great name soever proposed and countenanced. But in such points as come before me, in which I find that the Church hath not publicly determined, I shall conceive myself to be left at liberty to follow the dictamen of my own genius, but so that I shall regulate that liberty by the Traditions of the Church, and the unanimous consent of the Ancient Fathers; though in so doing I shall differ from many of the common and received opinions, which are now on foot. For why should I deny myself that liberty which the times allow me, in which not only Libertas opinandi, but Libertas prophetandi, (the liberty of Prophesying 'tis I mean) hath found so many advocates and so much indulgence? Common opinions many times are but common errors, and we may truly say of them as Calderinas did (in Ludovicus Vives) when he went to Mass, 
Whitac. Contr. 2. q. 9 c. 8.  Eamus ergo quia sic placet in communes errores. And as I shall make bold to use this liberty in representing to thy view my own opinions, so I shall leave thee to the like liberty also of liking or rejecting such of my opinions as are here presented, 
Horat. de art Poet.  (Hanc veniam petimusque damusque vicissim): and good reason too, for my opinions as they are but opinions, so they are but mine. As opinions; I am not bound to stand to them myself; as mine, I have no reason to obtrude them on another man. I may perhaps delight myself in some of my own fancies, and possibly may think myself not unfortunate in them: but I shall never be so wedded to my own opinions but that a clearer Judgement shall at any time divorce me from them.  
As for the book which is now before thee, I must confess that there was nothing less in my first intention then to write a Comment on the Creed: my purpose being only to inform myself in that part thereof which concerns Christ's sufferings, especially his descending into hell: a question at that time very hotly agitated. For having gotten the late Kings leave to retire to Winchester about the beginning of May, An. 1645. I met there with the learned and laborious work of B. bilson's, entitled, A Survey of Christ's suffering for man's redemption, etc. which finding very copious and intermixed with many things not pertinent to the present subject (though otherwise of great use and judgement) I was resolved to extract out of it all such proofs and arguments as concerned the local descent of Christ into hell, ●o reduce them to a clearer Method, and to add to them such conceptions and considerations which my own reading with the help of some other books could supply me with. Which having finished, and finding many things interspersed in the Bishop's book touching the sufferings of Christ; I thought it not amiss to collect out of him whatsoever did concern that argument, in the same manner as before: and then to add to it such considerations and discourses upon the crucifixion, death and burial of our Saviour Christ, as might make the story of his Passion from the beginning of his sufferings under Pontius Pilate to his victorious triumph over Hell and Satan complete and perfect. And then considering with myself, that not that Article alone of Christ's descending into hell, but the authority of the whole Creed had been lately quarrelled; (the opinion that it was not written by the holy Apostles being more openly maintained and more indulgently approved of, than I could imagine) I thought it of as great importance to vindicate the whole Creed, as assert one part; and then, and not till then did I first entertain the thoughts of bringing the whole work to that form and order, in which now thou seest it. For though I knew it was an Argument much vexed, and that many Commentaries and Expositions had been writ upon it; yet I conceived, that I was able, by interweaving some Polemical Disputes, and Philological Discourses, to give it somewhat more than a new dress only; and that what other censure soever might be laid upon it, that of Nil dictum est quod non dictum fuit prius, should find no place here. But I had scarce gone through with the general Preface, when the surrounding of Winchester by the forces of the Lords and Commons, made me leave that City; and with that City, the thoughts and opportunities of proceeding forwards; save that I made some entry on the first Article, at a private friends house in a Parish of Wiltshire, where I found some few tools to begin the work with. The miserable condition of the King my most gracious Master, the impendent ruin of the Church my most precious Mother, the unsetledness of my own affairs, and the dangers which every way did seem to threaten me, were a sufficient Supersedeas to all matter of study; even in the University itself (to which I was again returned not without some difficulties): where the war began to look more terrible, than it had done formerly. And I might say of writing books (as the world than went) as the Poet once did of making verses, 
Ovid. Tri●t. Eleg. 1.  
Carmina proveniunt animo deducta sereno,  
Me mare, me tellus, me fera jactat hyems.  
Carminibus metus omnis abest, ego perditus ensem  
Haesurum jugulo jam puto jamque meo.   
That is to say, 
Verses proceed from minds composed and free,  
Sea, earth, and tempests join to ruin me.  
Poet's must write secure from fears, not feel,  
As I do at my throat, the threatening steel.  Yet so intent I was upon my design, that as soon as I had waded through my Composition, and fixed myself on a certain dwelling near the place of my birth (which was about the middle of April, in the year 1647.) I resumed the work; and there, by God's assistance, as the necessity of my affairs gave me time and leisure, put an end unto it. So wand'ring and uncertain hath the latter part of my Pilgrimage been, that I began this work in Winchester the prime City of Hamshire, continued it in a Parish of Wiltshire, finished it at my house in Oxfordshire, and am now come to publish it (Quem das finem Rex magne laborum?) from Abington the chief Town of Berkshire. 
Virg. Aen. l. 1.  For I had but finished it, if that, and not bestowed my last hand upon it, when by the importunity of some special friends I was prevailed with to the writing of my large Cosmography. Which being published and received with some approbation, I began to fear I might go less in the esteem which I had gotten, If I should venture this piece to the public view. Jealous I was of being thought a better Geographer then Divine; or that it should be said of me (as it had been in some cases of some other men) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is to say, that I had spent more of my stock upon the Accessory then upon the Principal; more on Geography, which was a thing ad extra to me, than I had done upon Divinity my own proper element. Considering therefore to whose hands I might commend the perusal of it, I pitched at last on the right reverend Father in God, and my very good Lord, the Lord B. of Rochester; of whose severity in judging without partiality, and friendly counsel in advising without by-respects I was very confident. And he accordingly having bestowed some time upon it, returned me the encouragement and approbation of this following Letter, which (not without some hope of his Lordship's pardon) I shall here subjoin, as that which was the special motive to this publication.  

SIR,  
I Have as you desired, read your soul on the Apostles Symbol, and although I have not done it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, yet I have read it so, as I dare say when you shall have reviewed it, perfected the quotations, and added the last hand thereto, it shall not only redound to your deserved honour, but much, very much to the benefit of any candid and learned Reader. And in this Approbation, I have the concurrent judgement of a Scholar, and sound Divine, who read the book with me. There remains nothing more on my part, then to receive your directions where, and to whom the book shall be commended by  
Your real friend and humble servant JOHN ROFFENS. October, 14. 1651.   
I am now drawing towards an end (good Reader) and shall only tell thee, that I had entertained a Project of an higher nature, such as hath not been ventured on (for aught I can learn) by any other whosoever: which if God had pleased to continue me in those abilities of mind and body, which he hath formerly vouchsafed me, would more conduce to the advancement of good letters, than any or all the rest of my undertake. But I have found of late (God help me) such great and sensible decay of sight, that I may say too truly in the wiseman's words, Tenebrescunt videntes per foramina, & claudunt ostia in platea; that is to say, those that look out of the window be darkened, and the doors are shut in the streets, as our English reads it. And for my part, I never had the faculty (as some men have) of studying by another man's eyes, or turning over my books by another's hand; but have been fain to work out my performances by my proper strength without the least help or co-operation to assist me in them. If by thy prayers for good success on such Physical means, as I submit myself unto, it shall please God to make my sight so useful to me as to enable me to go through with the undertake, I shall with joy and cheerfulness employ the remainder of my time to complete that work, which I have digested in my thoughts: but so that it lies still within me, like an unpolished and unperfect Embryo in the Mother's womb: the children being come to the birth but wanting strength to be delivered. In the mean time, I render all humble and hearty thanks to the Lord my God, for giving me such a measure of his holy assistance, as to bring this work to a conclusion: which if it may redound to his glory, the benefit of this Church, and thy particular contentation, it is all I aim at: And that thou mayest receive herein the more full contentment, I have drawn up the heads and sum of all the Chapters, which I refer to thy perusal; and gathered an Errata or Correction of the faults, which I desire thee to amend accordingly as thou goest along: Thou wilt by that means be somewhat better able to judge whether Geography be better than Divinity, (Remember the now well known scoff which was put upon me). And so I leave thee to God's grace and the Church's blessing.  
Lacy's Court in Abingdon, june 6. 1654.   

POSTSCRIPT.  
READER,  
I Am to give thee notice, that in the seventh Chapter of the third Book there is a whole Section or Paragraph misplaced, that being subjoined to the end, which should have found its proper place in the beginning of that Chapter. And therefore I desire that after these words, viz. that he made Israel to sin, which thou shall find fol. 464. lin. 23. thou wouldst turn over to fol. 479. lin. 17. beginning with these words viz. I know it doth much trouble, etc. which having read to the end of that Section; thou mayest return to the place where thou wert before, viz. Now to these positive texts, etc. and so proceed unto the end without interruption. The rest of the Errata thou shalt find summed up after the general Contents, which I desire thee to correct, (as before was intimated) before thou settle to the work; and so fare thee well.   

SYLLABUS CAPITUM, OR The Contents of the Chapters.  

The PREFACE. Of the Authority and Antiquity of the Creed commonly called the Apostles Creed, with answer to the chief Objections which were made against it.  
ALl things made One by God from the first beginning. One Faith essential to the Church, and upon what reasons. What moved the Apostles to comprehend the chief heads of Faith in so short a Summary. Whether the Creed of the Apostles were not that form of sound Doctrine, which the Apostle recommends to Timothy. Proofs for the Antiquity of the Creed from Irenaeus and Tertullian; not the Creeds only, but the authority of the Fathers, disputed and disproved in these later times; and by whom; especially some reasons warranting the Creed to have been framed by the Apostles. The story how the Creed was made at large related by Ruffinus. The story of Ruffinus justified by the Ancient Writers. Traditions how far entertained in the Protestant Churches. An Apostolical Tradition by what marks discerned; and those marks found in the Tradition which transmits' the Creed. The reverend esteem held by the Ancients of the Creed in Commenting upon the same, and keeping it unaltered in the words and syllables. The Creed to be first learned by all that required Baptism▪ When first made part of the public Liturgy, and rehearsed by the people standing; in what particulars discriminated from other Formula's. The first objection, that the Creed is no Canonical Scripture, produced and answered. An answer to the second objection about the variation of the words in which the Creed was represented. Several significations of the Greek word Catholic, and that it was a word in use, in and before the time of the Apostles, contrary to the third objection. The last objection from the words of Ruffinus answered. The scope and Project of this work. The Authors appeal unto antiquity. The testimony given unto antiquity by the Ancient Writers; and also by the Church of England. Calvin's Authority produced for the asserting of this Creed to the twelve Apostles, closeth up the Preface.   

PART. I.  

CHAP. I. Of the name and definition of faith; the meaning of the phrase, in Deum▪ credere: The Exposition of it vindicated against all exceptions.  
THe Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what it signifies, and from whence it comes. The proper Etymology of the Latin fides. Faith how defined, and how it differeth from experience, knowledge, and opinion. The grounds of faith less fallible, th●n that of any Art or Science. Why faith is called by St. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or, the substance of things not seen, etc. The usual distinction between credere Deum, credere Deo, and credere in Deum, proposed and explicated, according to the general tendries of the Schools: neither the phrase in Deum or in Christum credere and the distinction thereon founded, so generally true as it is pretended. Credere with the proposition in, not so peculiar unto God, as by some conceived. No difference in holy Scripture between Deo and in Deum credere; nor in the meaning of the Creed. Of the faith of Reprobates; and why faith hath the name of fides electorum, in the Book of God. The faith of Devils, what it is; and why it rather makes them tremble, then serves to nourish them in the hope of grace and pardon. The Vulgar distinction of faith into Salvifical, Historical, Temporary, and the faith of Miracles, proposed, examined, and rejected.   

CHAP. II. That there is a God, and but one God only; and that this one God is a pure and Immortal Spirit, and the sole Governor of the world; proved by the light of reason, and the testimony of the ancient Gentiles.  
THe notion of a Deity ingraffed naturally in the soul of man. Pretagoras, Diagoras, and Euhemerus, why counted Atheists in old times. Fortune and Fate why reckoned of as gods, by some old Philosophers. Natural proofs for this truth, that there is but one God, summed up together and produced by Minutius Felix; and seconded by the testimonies of Mercurius Trismegistus, the Sibyls, and Apollo himself; confirmed by the suffrages of Orpheus, and the old Greek Poets. The being of one God alone strongly maintained by Socrates, affirmed by Plato and his followers; countenanced by Aristotle, and the Peripatetics; verified also by the Academics, the most rigid Stoics, and by the general acknowledgement of all sorts of people. The judgement of the learned Gentiles touching the Essence and Attributes of God, conformable to that of the Orthodox Christians. The Heresies of the Manichees, and the Anthropomorphites, confuted by the writings of the old Philosophers. A parallel between the Tutelary gods of the old Idolaters, and the Topical or local Saints of the Pontificians.   

CHAP. III. Of the Essence and Attributes of God, according to the holy Scripture; the name of Father, how applied to God. Of his Mercy, Justice, and Omnipotency.  
THe diligence of justin Martyr, when an Heathen, in the search of God. The name JEHOVAH when, and for what occasion first given to God in holy Scripture. The superstition of the later jews in the use thereof. The Hebrew Elohim sometimes communicated to the creature. The several Etymologies of the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The names of El, Elion, and Adonai, what they do import. Of the Simplicity, Eternity and Omnipresence of God. Of his Knowledge, Wisdom, and Omnipotency. The name of Father Almighty given to God by the learned Gentiles. God, in what sense, the Father of our Lord JESUS CHRIST; and of none but him. The pre-eminence due in that respect to God the Father, the name of Father how communicable to the whole Godhead. God proved to be the Father of all mankind; in the right of Creation; and of his faithful people by the laws of Adoption: Many resemblances between adoptions among men, and man's adoption to the sonship of Almighty God. The love, care, and authority of our Heavenly Father, compared with that of our earthly parents. The care of God in educating all his children in the knowledge of his will, how far extended unto the Infidels and Pagans, and how far beneficial to them. The title of Almighty given to God the Father, what it importeth in itself; and what in reference to the creature, to his Church especially.   

CHAP. IU. Of the Creation of the World and the parts thereof, that it was made at first by God's Almighty power, and since continually preserved by his infinite Providence.  
GEneral inducements moving God to create the world. An answer to that idle question, what God did before the creating of the world. The error of Lactantius in it. God differenced by this great work, from the gods of the Gentiles, and that in the opinion of the Gentiles themselves. The work of the Creation ascribed to the whole Godhead jointly in the holy Scripture. Of the first matter out of which, and the time when it was created. The opinion of the world's eternity, refelled by Cicero: why supposed by Aristotle. The world's creation by the power of Almighty God, proved by the testimonies of Trismegistus, of Plato, Aristotle, and others of the learned Greeks: As also by the suffrages of Varro, Tully, Seneca, and others of the principal wits amongst the Latins. Why God did pass no approbation on the works of the second day, and doubled it upon the third. Probable proofs, that by the waters above the Firmament, mentioned in the first of Genesis, Moses intended not the clouds and rain, but some great body of waters above the Spheres. The praise and honour due to God for the world's creation. The general Providence of God in ordering the affairs thereof, asserted both against the Stoics and the Epicureans. God's goodness towards all mankind, especially to his chosen people. And of his justice, or veracity in performing the promises made unto them. God's justice in retaliating to the sons of men, and meeting to them, with that measure which they meet to other. ungodly men how used as executioners of divine vengeance. That neither the impunity nor prosperous successes of the wicked, in this present world, are inconsistent with the justice of Almighty God.   

CHAP. V. Of the creation of Angels. The Ministry and office of the good. The fall and punishment of the evil Angels, and also of the creation and fall of man.  
OF the name and nature of the Angels. Why the creatioon of the Angels not expressed in Scripture. Probable conjectures that the Angels were created before the beginning of the world, and those conjectures backed by authority of the Ancients both Greeks and Latins. The several orders and degrees of the holy Angels. The Angels, ministering to Almighty God, not only in inflicting punishments upon the wicked, but in protection of the godly. Many things said in Scripture to be done by God, which were effected by the Ministry of the blessed Angels. That every one of God's people, and they alone, hath his Angel-guardian, proved not only by the authority of the Ancients, but by the testimony of the Scripture. Of the Daemons of the ancient Gentiles. That the worshipping of Angels mentioned in Coloss. 2. did arise from thence. Angel worship not alone forbidden by Scriptures, and Fathers, but by the very Angels themselves. The evil Angels first created in a state of integrity. Of their confederacy and fall. That the sin of ambition was the cause of the fall, proved by the Scriptures, and the Fathers; and by several reasons. Several differences between the sin and fall of man, and the sin and fall of the evil Angels. The reason why CHRIST took not on himself the Angelical nature. The Devil's diligence and design in seducing mankind. The Devil why, and how, called the Tempter. Of the Mali Genii. Of the Gentiles and that the Daemonium Socratis so often mentioned by the Ancients, was not of that nature. Several Artifices of the Daemons in gaining Divine honours to themselves. The Devil not without much difficulty, dispossessed of the Sovereignty he had gotten in the souls of men. The goodly structure of man's body, and some contemplations thence arising. That the soul of man is not ex traduce, proved by the Scriptures, and the Fathers. The Image of God imprinted on mankind, in what it doth consist especially; and of the several degrees and perfections of it. The voluntary fall of man, and how it came to be imputed to his whole posterity: the remedy of God provided to restore lost man. The fall of Adam not decreed, and in what sense permitted by Almighty God.   

CHAP. VI What Faith it was which was required for Justification, before and under the Law of Moses. Of the knowledge which the Patriarches and Prophets had, touching Christ to come. Touching the Sacrifices of the Jews; the salvation of the Gentiles; and the justifying power of Faith.  
THe general project of this Chapter. No faith in Christ required of Adam, till his fall; nor after that explicitly affirmed of our Father Abraham. The error and mistake of Eve, touching the Messias. Whether the Prophets fully understood their own predictions touching Christ to come. In what Gods Prophets differed from the Heathen Soothsayers. The Heathen Soothsayers why called extatici, and arreptitii, and furiosi. No explicit faith in Christ required of the Patriarches before the law, nor of the people of the jews, who lived under the Law. What faith it was which was imputed for righteousness to our Father Abraham. The Sacrifices of the jews not counted expiatory in reference unto Christ to come: but by the Ordinance and Institution of Almighty God. Why CHRIST is said in Scripture to be the end of the Law. Or the advantages which the jews had above other Nations. The Gentiles not left destitute of means, and helps, to bring them to the knowledge and Worship of God. No point of Reverence performed by God's people anciently in the act of Worship, which was not practised by the Gentiles. The Sacrifices of the Gentiles what they aimed at chiefly, before perverted by the Devil. The Sacrificing of men and women among the Gentiles, by whom first introduced; and upon what grounds. The eminence of some Gentiles in all moral virtues. The union of man's soul with Almighty God, proposed as the chiefend of li●e by the old Philosophers. The salvation of the nobler souls amongst the Gentiles, defended by some late Divines; denied by St. Augustine formerly, and upon what grounds: the grounds on which he built examined. The virtues of the Gentiles not to be counted sins or vices for any circumstantial imperfections which are noted in them. The special help wherewith God might supply amongst the Gentiles, the want of Scripture. The charitable opinion of Franciscus junius, touching the Infants of the Gentiles. The case of the Gentiles altered since our Saviour's passion; and so St. Peter, Act. 2. and the 17. Article of the Church of England, to be understood. What it is, that makes Faith instrumental unto justification. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere, or the act of faith, imputed to a man for righteousness, proved by the testimony of the Scriptures, and the Ancient Writers. The Homilies of the Church explicated, and applied to the present point.    

LIBER II.  

CHAP. I. Nothing revealed to the Gentiles, touching Christ to come. The Name of JESUS what it signifies, and of bowing at it. Of the name CHRIST, and the Offices therein included. The name of Christians how given unto his Disciples.  
SAlvation of the world by Christ, kept as a Mystery from the Gentiles generally before the Preaching of the Gospel. The Sibylline Oracles what they say of Christ; not to be counted pie frauds, and with what care preserved from the common view. The term or ●●tion of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the WORD, frequently found in Plato, and his followers. The sum of our belief touching Christ our Saviour. The name of JESUS whence derived, and what it signifieth. A parallel between JESUS the Son of God, and joshua or jesus the son of Nun. The Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rendered Salvator, by the Writers in the Christian Church, till the alteration made by Beza, and of the full meaning of those words. The dignity of the name of jesus. That bowing at the Name of JESUS, was anciently used in the Church of Christ, and from the first beginning of the Reformation in the Church of England. The name CHRIST, whence derived, and what it signifieth; and of the several Offices it relates unto. That the name of Christian was not given unto the followers of Christ's Doctrine, without some solemnities. Chrestos and Chrectiani, mistakingly used for Christus, and Christiani, by some Heathen Writers.   

CHAP. II. That JESUS CHRIST is the Son of God: Why called his only, or his only begotten Son. Proofs for the Godhead of our Saviour. Of the title of LORD.  
THe name of the Son or Sons of God, ascribed in several respects, to men and Angels, and also to the Saints departed; given in a more peculiar manner to Kings and Prophets, then unto any other of the sons of men: in all of these respects communicable unto CHRIST our Saviour; but after a more excellent manner then to all the rest. CHRIST not the Son of God only, but his only Son; properly to be called the natural and begotten Son of Almighty God, in reference to his birth from the Virgin Mary. The only Son, and the best beloved Son equivalent in holy Scripture. Christ why entitled the first born of every creature. The rights of Primogeniture what they were, and how vested in him. CHRIST so to be accounted the Son of God, as to be also God the Son. That the Messiah was to come in the form of man. The testimony given by Christ to his own Divinity cleared from all exceptions. The story of Theodosius the jew in Suidas touching Christ our Saviour, justified. The testimony given to Christ's Divinity by the Heathen Oracles, The falling of the Egyptian Idols, the Poet Virgil, and the Roman Centurion. The Heresies of Ebion, Artemon and Samosatenus, in making Christ our Saviour a mere natural man; briefly recited, and condemned. The perplexed niceties of the School, avoided purposely by the Author. The name of LORD appropriated in the Old Testament unto God the Father, but more peculiar since the time of the Gospel, to God the Son. The title of LORD disclaimed by the first Roman Emperors; and upon what reasons. CHRIST made our LORD not only in the right of purchase, but also by the law of Arms.   

CHAP. III. Of God's free mercy in the Redemption of man; the WORD why fitted to effect it. The Incarnation of the Word why attributed to the holy Ghost; the Miracle thereof made credible both to Jews and Gentiles.  
THe controversy between Mercy, Peace, Truth, and justice, on the fall of man; made up and reconciled by the oblation of Christ, then designed and promised. That God could have saved mankind by some other means, then by the Incarnation and death of Christ, had he been so minded. The Oblation of Christ rather a voluntary act of his own mere goodness then necessitated by imposition or decree. Some reasons why the work of the Incarnation, was to be acted chiefly by the holy Ghost. The manner of the Incarnation with a more genuine explication of the Virgin's answer. The miraculous obumbration of the holy Ghost, made more intelligible by two parallel cases. The impure fancies of some Romish Votaries touching this Obumbration, and the blessed Virgin. The large faculties of Friar Tekell. Sleidan corrupted by the Papists. The strange conceit of Estius, in making Christ the principal, if not only Agent, in the Incarnation. The miracle of the Incarnation made perceptible to the natural man, to the jews and Gentiles. The Virgin's Faith a great facilitating to the Incarnation. The Antiquity of the feasts of Annunciation. Christ why not called the Son of the holy Ghost. The body of Christ not form all at once, as some Popishs' writers do affirm, and the reasons why.   

CHAP. IU. Of the birth of CHRIST; the Feast of his Nativity. Why born of a Virgin. The Prophecy of Esaiah, the Parentage and privileges of the blessed Virgin.  
NO cause for the WORD to be made flesh but man's Redemption. Our Saviour Christ not only born, but made of the Virgin Mary, and the manner how. That several Heresies in the Primitive times touching this particular. The time and place made happy by our Saviour's birth. That Christ was born upon the five and twentyeth day of December, proved by the general consent of all Christian Churches. The high opinion of that day in the Primitive times. The miracle of Christ being born of a Virgin Mother made perceptible by some like cases in the Book of God. A parallel between Eve and the Virgin Mary. The promise made by God to Eve. The clearest Prophecy in Scripture, that Christ our Saviour should be born of a Virgin-Mother. That so much celebrated Prophecy, Behold a Virgin shall conceive, etc. not meant originally and literally of the birth of Christ. The genuine meaning of the Text, and how it was fulfilled in our Saviour's birth. Whether Christ were the direct heir of the house of David. The Genealogy of Christ why laid down in such different ways, by the two Evangelists. The perpetual Virginity of Christ's Mother asserted against the Heretics of former times, defended on wrong grounds by the Pontificians. The Virgin freed from Original sin by some zealous Papists; and of the controversy raised about it in the Church of Rome. What may be warrantably thought touching that particular. The extreme errors of Helvidius and the Antidicomaritani in giving too little, and of the Collyridians' and the Papists on the other side, in giving too great honour to the blessed Virgin. Some strange extra●vigancies of the learned and vulgar Papists. The moderation in that kind of the Church of England. The body of Christ a real, not an imaginary substance; and subject to the passions and infirmities of a natural body.   

CHAP. V. Of the sufferings of our Saviour under Pontius Pilate, and first of those temptations which he suffered at the hands of the Devil.  
Annas' and Caiaphas why said to be High Priests at the self same time. Of Pontius Pilate his barbarous and rigid nature; and of the slaughter which he made of the Galileans. By what SPIRIT, for what reasons, and into what part of the Wilderness Christ was led to be tempted. A parallel between Christ and the Scape-goat. Reasons for our Redeemers fast; why neither more nor less, then just forty days. Of the Ember weeks. The institution and antiquity of the Lenten fast; and why first ordained. St. Luke and St. Matthew reconciled. A short view of the three temptations; with a removal of some difficulties, which concern the same. How Satan could show Christ our Saviour from the top of a mountain, and in so short a space of time, the Kingdoms of the earth, and the glories of them. In what respects it is said of Christ, that he was, or could be tempted of the Devil.   

CHAP. VI Of the afflictions which our Saviour suffered both in his soul and body, under Pontius Pilate; in the great work of MAN'S REDEMPTION.  
THe heaviness which fell on Christ not so great and terrible as to deprive him of his senses. In what respect it is said of Christ in his holy Gospel, that his soul was sorrowful to the death. The Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what it signifieth in the holy Penmen. The meaning of our Saviour's words, joh. 12.27. No contrariety in Christ's Prayer to the will of God. Why death appeared so terrible in our Saviour's eye. The judgement of the Ancients on that Prayer of Christ. The doctrine of the Schools touching the natural fear of death. Why Christ desired not to receive that Cup from the hands of the jews. Of the comfort which the Angel brought unto our Saviour in the time of his heaviness. A passage of St. Paul expounded, Heb. 57 The meaning of the word Agony in the best Greek Writers, and in the usual style of Scripture. Christ's Agony and bloody sweat, rather to be imputed unto a fervency of zeal, than an extremity of pain. The sentence put upon our Saviour in the High Priests Hall, and at the judgement Seat of Pilate. A brief survey of Christ's sufferings both in soul and body.   

CHAP. VII. Of the crucifying, death, and burial of the Lord JESUS CHRIST; with the diquisition of all particulars incident thereunto.  
THe death of Christ prefigured both in that of Abel, and of Abel's lamb. The definition of a Sacrifice how abused by Bellarmine, and on what design. The Sacrifices of the Law how accounted expiatory. Several resemblances between the Sacrifices of Christ and the legal sacrifices. A parallel beawixt Christ and Isaac, and betwixt Christ and the Brazen Serpent. Calvin's interpretation, and the practice of the Papists much alike unsound. How Christ is said to be made a curse. The cruel intention of the jews, to prolong Christ's miseries under the false disguise of pity. Several sorts of Dereliction, and in what sort our Saviour Christ complained that he was forsaken. Whether Christ spoke those words in his own Person, or in the person of his members: the Schoolmen in this point very sound and solid. Why vinegar was given to Christ, at the time of his passion. The meaning of those words, Consummatum est. That the death of Christ is rather to be counted voluntary, than either violent or natural; and upon what reasons. The death of Christ upon the Cross a full Propitiation for the sins of man, both in the judgement of Scriptures and the Ancient Fathers. That Christ suffered not the death of the soul, as impiously is affirmed by some. The Eucharist ordained for a Sacrifice by our Lord and Saviour. The Sacrifice or Oblation of Bread and Wine, used anciently (by that very name) in the Church of Christ; why called Commemorative, and why an Eucharistical sacrifice, and why the Sacrament of the Altar. The Sacrifice asserted by the Ancient Writers, corrupted by the Church of Rome, and piously restored by the Church of England. St. Cyprian wrested by the Papists to defend their Mass. A parallel between the Peace-offerings and the blessed Eucharist. The renting of the Veil at our Saviour's passion, what it might portend. The Earthquake and Eclipse then happening, testified out of Heathen writers. The reconciliation of St. Mark and St. john about the time and hour of our Saviour's suffering. Various opinions in that point, and which most improbable. Universality of redemption defended by the Church of England. Both Sacraments how said to issue from our Saviour's side. The breaking of our Saviour's body in the holy Eucharist, how it agreeth with the not breaking of his bones. The true and proper meaning of the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Certain considerations on our Saviour's burial; and of the weekly fasting days thereupon occasioned. That judas hanged himself, made good from the ancient Fathers; against the new devise of Daniel Heinsius. The fearful and calamitous ends of Pontius Pilate, Annas, Cajaphas, and the whole nation of the jews.   

CHAP. VIII. Of the local descent of Christ into hell. Hades and inferi what they signify in the best Greek and Latin authors, and in the text of holy Scripture; an examination, and confutation of the contrary opinions.  
CHrists descent into hell the first degree of his Exaltation; and so esteemed by many of the ancient Fathers. The drift and project of this Chapter. Several Etymologies of the Greek word HADES. The Greek word HADES, used most commonly by the old Greek writers to signify hell, the place of torments; sometimes to signify Pluto, the King of hell: the word so used also by the sacred Penmen of the new Testament. The faultiness of our last translators in rendering the Greek HADES by the English grave, 1 Cor. 15.55 etc. contrary to the exposition of the best interpreters. By HADES in the Ecclesiastical notion of it is meant only hell in the opinion of all Greek writers of the elder and middle times. The Latin word inferi whence derived, and what it signifieth. Inferi generally used by the Ancient writers for the place of torments; not for the receptacles or repositories of the righteous souls. The Greek word Hades generally rendered in the new Testament, by the Latin inferi. The meaning of these words, viz. He descended into hell, Grammatically gathered from the Premises. Arguments for the local descent of Christ into hell from St. Paul's words, Rom. 10.6, 7. and Ephes. 4.8, 9, etc. with the explication of both places. The leading of captivity captive, Ephes. 4. and the spoiling of principalities and powers, Col. 2.15. used by the ancients as arguments for Christ's descent into hell: the like proved by Saint Peter's argument, Act. 2.27 etc. the pains of death mentioned vers. 2.24. in the latter editions of that book, the very same with the pains of hell in some ancient copies. The Local descent of Christ into hell, proved by the constant and successive testimonies of the old Greek Fathers; and by the general current of the Latin writers: together with the reasons which induced him to it. Considerations on this point, viz. whether Christ by his descent into hell, delivered thence the souls of such holy men, as either died under or before the Law. Bullengers' moderation in it.   

CHAP. IX. The Doctrine of the Church of England touching Christ's descent into Hell, asserted from all contrary opinions, which are here examined and disproved.  
THe Doctrine of the Church of England touching the local descent of Christ into Hell, delivered in the book of Articles, in the book of Homilies, and Catechisms publicly allowed. The error of Mr. Rogers in that point, charged upon the Church. The Doctrine of a local descent, defended by the most eminent writers in the Protestant Churches; and of some of the Reformed also. The first objection against the local descent, viz. that there was no such clause in the old Creed or Symbol of the Church of Rome. The second objection, that our Saviour went on the day of his passion with the Thief to Paradise. The third objection, that Christ at the instant of his death commended his soul into the hands of God the Father. The pertinency and profitableness of the local descent, declared and stated; and freed from all the Cavils which are made against it. The false construction of this Article by our Masters in the Church of Rome. Brentius and Calvin falsely charged by Bellarmine. The Article of Christ's descent, by whom first made the same with his burial; the inconvenience of that sense, and the absurdities of Beza in indevoring to make it good. The new devise, which makes the descent into hell to be nothing else, but a continuance for three days in the state of death; proposed, and answered. A Theological Dictionary necessary for young Divines. The Author and progress of the new opinion, touching the suffering of hell pains in our Saviour's soul. A particular of the torments in hell; that is to say, remorse of conscience, 2. rejection from the favour of God, 3. despair of God's mercy, 4. the fiery flames there being. That none of all these could find place in our Saviour's soul. The blasphemy of some who teach that Christ descended into hell, to suffer there the torments of the damned souls. Several sorts of punishment agreed on by the Schoolmen; and how far Christ was liable to any of them. Eternity of punishments how proportioned to the sin of Man. Two objections answered. The Doctrine of the Church of England still the same it was.   

CHAP. X. Of the Resurrection of our Lord and Saviour; with a consideration of the circumstances, and other points incident to that Article.  
THe Article of Christ's resurrection. Most proper for St. Thomas, and upon what reasons. The credibility of the resurrection proposed and proved, by the types of Isaac, and of joseph. joseph why called Zaphnath-paaneah. The types of Daniel, and of jonah: and how appliable, especially the last, to the story of Christ. Examples of a resurrection no strange thing to the jews themselves. The Resurrection of Christ foretold by the holy Prophets; the time and place thereof, sufficient to convince the jews of their incredulity. The allegation of the Soldiers touching the stealing of Christ's body, examined and derided. The Doctrine of the Resurrection of how swift a growth. Arguments for the resurrection to convince the Gentiles. How Christ may be said to lie in the grave three days and three nights. Several ways to salve the doubt, and which most probable. The strange conceits of Gregory Nyssen, and of Dr. Alabaster; with the learned and judicious Solution, made in the case by Paulus Semproniensis an Italian Bishop. An accord made between the four Evangelists about the time and hour of the resurrection. The first day of the week why chosen for the day of the resurrection? why, and by whom celebrated as a weekly Festival? why Christ was raised from the dead in a terrible earthquake? why he appeared first to women? and why first of all to Mary Magdalen? How Christ is said to be the first fruits of the dead. The resurrection of Christ's body a sure pledge of ours. Some reasons for the resurrection in respect of Christ, and the necessity thereof in respect of man. The Institution and antiquity of the feast of Easter; the high esteem it had in the Primitive times, and anciently in the Isle of Britain; the extreme follies of some men, on the other side.   

CHAP. XI. Of the Ascension of our Saviour; with a discussion of the points and other circumstances, which are most considerable in the same.  
THe connexion between the Ascension of Christ, and the coming down of the holy Ghost foresignifyed by the Prophet David. The antiquity of the feast of holy Thursday. Some doubts resolved about the time and place of the Ascension; the Creed reconciled with the Gospel. Enoch and Elijah types of Christ's Ascension; and in what particulars. The Prophecies in holy Scripture touching Christ's ascension, as also touching the time, place and manner of it; with observations upon each. A parallel between the old Roman triumphs and the Lords ascension. Probable conjectures of the disposing of those bodies, which were raised with Christ. The Captives what they were, which Christ led in triumph. The benefits redounding unto mankind by Christ's ascension. A dissertation of the problem, whether Christ merited for himself, or ●or mankind only. The inconsequence of Maldonates' illation, touching the worshipping of Christ after his ascension. That the body of Christ after his Ascension, doth still remain a natural body, proved by the Scriptures and the Fathers. The Doctrine of Transubstantiation destructive of Christ's natural body; and of the monstrous Paradoxes which do thence arise.   

CHAP. XII. Of sitting at the right hand of God; the proper meaning of the Phrase; and of the Privileges which accrue thereby to our Lord and Saviour.  
THe meaning of the phrase sedere ad dextram Dei. Sitting at the right hand of Kings and Princes, accounted for the greatest honour that could be done unto a subject; not always so, though so in ordinary use, amongst common persons. The middle, the most honourable place, amongst the Romans and Numidians. The right hand of God what it signified in holy Scripture. The right hand, a hand of power, and love; as also of friendship and fidelity. What the word sitting meaneth in the present Article. Sitting and standing words of repose and ease; and how both Postures do agree with Christ in his several offices. The ill construction made by Maldonate, touching Christ's sitting at the right hand of God the Father; the faultiness of his Rule, and instance upon that occasion; his aim therein discovered, canvassed and confuted. That Christ by sitting at the right hand of God, obtaineth not an equality with God the Father, contrary to the common opinion of the Protestant Schools. Several Preeminences given to Christ by sitting at the right hand of God above all the Angels. That sitting at the right hand of God, may piously be taken in a literal and Grammatical sense. Considerations to that purpose, to make it percepitble and intelligible to a rational man. Moderation in matters of opinion practised by the Ancients, and approved by the Author.   

CHAP. XIII. Of the Priesthood of our Lord and Saviour which he executeth sitting at the right hand of God, wherein it was foresignifyed by that of Melchisedech; in what particulars it consisteth; and of Melchisedech himself.  
THe Regal and Sacerdotal offices exercised by Christ as he sitteth at the right hand of God. The difference between the calling of Christ and that of Aaron; the Parallel and differences between the consecration of Christ, and the consecration of Aaron; seven days designed unto the consecration of Christ, how employed and spent; the Priesthood of Christ when it took beginning. Melchisedech what he was, and from whom descended. In what the Priesthood of Melchisedech did consist especially, with the error of the Papists in that particular. Resemblances between Melchisedech and Christ in their name and titles; and in performance of the office of the holy Priesthood. Christ made the Mediator between God and man, and upon what reasons the Mediator not of redemption only, as the Papists say, but of intercession. A story of Themistocles how applied to Christ. How necessary it was, in reference to the Priestly office, that Christ should have humane infirmities about him. The ingenious conceit of Mat. Corvinus K. of Hungary. No sacrifice for sin, but that of Christ upon the cross. The Heterodoxies of the Church of Rome, and Orthodoxy of the Church of England, in that particular. The smart but true censure of Averro the Moor upon the Christians of his time. The sacrifice of Christ though not to be reiterated by man, yet daily to be represented by Christ himself unto God the Father. The manner how Christ made his entrance into the sanctum Sanctorum, compared with that of the high Priest in the jewish Church A right of titles inherent in the Priesthood of our Lord and Saviour, and consequently in the Ministers of the Gospel also.   

CHAP. XIV. Of the Regal or Kingly office of our Lord as far as it is executed before his coming unto judgement. Of his Vicegerents on the earth, and of the several Viceroys put upon him by the Papists and the Presbyterians.  
THe title of King designed to Christ long before his birth, given to him by the Soldiers and confirmed by Pilate. The general opinion of the jews and of the Apostles and Disciples for a temporal Kingdom to be set up by their Messiah; the like amongst the Gentiles also. Christ called the head of the Church, and upon what reasons. The actual possession of the Kingdom not conferred on Christ till his resurrection. Several texts of Scripture explained and applied for the proof thereof. Christ by his regal power defends his Church against all her enemies; and what those enemies are against which he chiefly doth defend it. Of the Legislative power of Christ, of obedience to his laws and the rewards and punishments appendent on them. No Viceroy necessary on the earth to supply Christ's absence. The Monarchy of the Pope ill grounded under that pretence. The many Viceroys thrust upon the Church, by the Presbyterians; with the great prerogatives given unto them. Bishops the Vicars of Christ in spiritual matters; and Kings, in the external regiment of the holy Church. That Kings are Deputies unto Christ, not only unto God the Father, proved both by Scriptures and by Fathers. The Cross why placed upon the top of the regal Crown. How, and in what respects, Christ's Kingdom is said to have an end. Charity, for what reasons greater than faith, and hope. The proper meaning of those words, viz. Then shall he deliver up the Kingdom unto God the Father; disputed, canvassed, and determined.   

CHAP. XV. Touching the coming of our Saviour to judgement both of quick and dead; the souls of just men not in the highest state of bliss till the day of judgement; and of the time and place and other circumstances of that action.  
THe several degrees of CHRIST'S exaltation. A day of judgement granted by the sober Gentiles. Considerations to induce a natural man to that persuasion, and to enforce a Christian to it. That Christ should execute his judgement, kept as a mystery from the Gentiles. Reasons for which the act of judging both the quick and the dead, should be conferred by God, on his Son CHRIST JESUS. That the souls of righteous men attain not to the highest degree of happiness till the day of judgement, proved by authority of Scriptures; by the Greek Fathers, and the Latin; by Calvin and some leading men of the reformation. The alteration of this Doctrine in the Church of Rome, and the reason of it. The torments of the wicked aggravated in the day of judgement. The terrors of that day described, with the manner of it. The error of Lactantius in the last particular. How CHRIST is said to be ignorant of the time and hour of the day of judgement. The gross absurdity of Estius in his solution of the doubt, and his aim therein. The audaciousness of some late adventurers, in pointing out the year and day of the final judgement. The valley of jehosophat designed to the place of the general judgement. The Eastern part of heaven most honoured with our Saviour's presence. The use of praying towards the East, of how great antiquity. That by the sign of the Son of man, Mat. 24.30. we are to understand the sign of the cross, proved by the Western Fathers, and the Southern Churches. The sounding of the trumpet in the day of judgement, whether Literally or Metaphorically to be understood. The several offices of the Angels in the day of judgement. The Saints how said to judge the world▪ The Method used by Christ in the act of judging. The consideration of that day, of what use and efficacy in the ways of life.    

LIBER III.  

CHAP. I. Touching the holy Ghost, his divine nature, power, and office. The controversy of his Procession laid down historically. Of receiving the holy Ghost, and of the several Ministrations in the Church appointed by him.  
Several significations of these words, the holy Ghost, in the new Testament. The meaning of the Article according to the Doctrine of the Church of England. The derivation of the name, and the meaning of it in Greek, Latin, and English. The general extent of the word Spirit more appositely fitted to the holy Ghost. The divinity of the holy Ghost clearly asserted from the constant current of the book of God. The gross absurdity of Harding in making the divinity of the holy Ghost to depend merely upon tradition and humane authority. The many differences among the writers of all ages, and between St. Augustine with himself, touching the sin or blasphemy against the holy Ghost. The stating of the controversy by the learned Knight Sir R. F. That the differences between the Greek and Latin Churches concerning the procession of the holy Ghost, are rather verbal then material; and so affirmed to be by most moderate men amongst the Papists. The judgement of antiquity in the present controversy. The clause a Filioque first added to the ancient Creeds by some Spanish Prelates, and after countenanced and confirby the Popes of Rome. The great uncharitableness of the Romanists against the Grecians for not admitting of that clause. The graces of the holy Ghost distributed into Gratis data, and Gratum facientia, with the use of either. Why Simon Magus did assert the title of the great power of God. Sanctification the peculiar work of the holy Ghost, and where most descernible. Christ the chief Pastor of the Church, discharged not the Prophetical office, until he had received the unction of the holy Spirit. The Ministration of holy things conferred by Christ on his Apostles, actuated and enlarged by the holy Ghost. The feast of Pentecost an holy Anniversary in the Church, and of what antiquity. The name and function of a Bishop, in St. Paul's distribution of Ecclesiastical offices, included under that of Pastor. None to officiate in the Church but those that have both mission and commission too. The meaning and effect of those solemn words, viz. receive the holy Ghost used in Ordination. The use thereof asserted against factious Novelty. The holy Ghost the primary Author of the whole Canon of the Scripture. The Canon of the Evangelical and Prophetical writings closed and concluded by St. john. The dignity and sufficiency of the written word asserted both against some Prelates in the Church of Rome, and our great Innovators in the Church of England.   

CHAP. II. Of the name and definition of the Church. Of the title of Catholic. The Church in what respects called holy. Touching the head and members of it. The government thereof Aristocratical.  
THe name Church no where to be found in the old Testament. The derivation of the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and what it signifieth in old Authors. The Christian Church called not improperly, by the name of a Congregation. The officiation of that word in our old Translators, and the unsound construction of it by the Church of Rome. Whence the word CHURCH in English hath its derivation. The word promiscuously used in the elder times, to signify the place of meeting, and the people which did therein meet. That by these words Ecclesia quae est domi ejus, St. Paul meaneth not a private family, but a Congregation. Several significations of the word in the Ecclesiastical notion of it. The Clergy sometimes called the Church. The Church called Catholic in respect of time, place, and persons. Catholic anciently used for sound and Orthodox; appropriated to themselves by the Pontificians, and unadvisedly yielded to them by the common Protestants. Those of Rome more delighted with the name of Papists then with that of Christian. The Church to be accounted holy notwithstanding the unholiness of particular persons. The error of the old and new Novatians touching that particular, confuted by the constant current of the book of God. Neither the Schismatic, nor the Heretic, excluded from being Members of the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church consists not only of Elect or Predestinate persons. The Pope's supremacy made by those of Rome the principal Article of their faith. Of the strange powers ascribed unto the Pope by some flattering Sycophants; as well in temporal matters, as in things Spiritual. The Pope and Church made terms convertible in the Schools of Rome. The contrary error of the Presbyterians and Independents in making the Church to be all body. St. Hieroms old complaint revived in these present times. The old Acephory what they were, and in whom revived. The Apostles all of equal power, amongst themselves, and so the Bishops too in the Primitive times, as successors to the Apostles in the public government. Literae Formulae what they were in the elder ages. Of the supremacy in sacred matters exercised by the Kings of judah: and of that given by Law and Canon to the Kings of England.   

CHAP. III. Of the visibility and infallibility of the Church of Christ; and of the Church's power in expounding Scripture, determining controversies of the faith, and ordaining ceremonies.  
WHat we are bound to believe and practise touching the holy Catholic Church, in the present Article. The Church at all times visible, and in what respects. The Church of God not altogether, or at all invisible in the time of Ahab and Elijah; nor in that of Antiochus, and the Maccabees. Arianisme not so universal when at the greatest, as to make the Church to be invisible. The visibility of the Church in the greatest prevalency of the Popedom; not to be looked for in the congregations of the Albigenses. hus or Wicliffes' answer to the question, Where our Church was before Luther's time; the Church of Rome a true Church, though both erroneous in Doctrine and corrupt in manners. The Universal Church of Christ not subject unto error in points of Faith. The promises of Christ made good unto the Universal, though not to all particular Churches. The opposition made to Arianism in the Western Churches: and in the Church's East and West, to the Pope's Supremacy, to the forced Celibat of Priests, to Transubstantiation, to the half Communion, to Purgatory, Worshipping of Images, and to Auricular confession. General Counsels why ordained; how far they are privileged from error, and of what authority. The Article of the Church of ENGLAND touching General Counsels abused and falsified. The power of National and Provincial Counsels in the points of faith, not only manifested and asserted in the elder times, but strenuously maintained by the Synod of Dort. Four Offices of the Church about the Scripture. The practices of the jews and Arians to corrupt the Text. The Church's power to interpret Scripture asserted both by Ancient and Modern Writers. The Ordinances of the Church, of how great authority: and that authority made good by some later Writers. The judgement and practice of the Augustane, Bohemian and Helvetian Churches in the present point. Two rules for the directing of the Church's power in ordaining Ceremonies. How far the Ordinances of the Church do bind the Conscience.   

CHAP. IU. Of the Communion which the Saints have with one another, and with CHRIST their Head. Communion of affections inferreth not a community of goods and fortunes. Prayers to the Saints and adoration of their Images an ill result of this communion.  
THe nature and meaning of the word Communio in the Ecclesiastical notions of it. The word Saints variously taken in holy Scripture. In what particulars the Communion of the Saints doth consist especially. The Union or Communion which the Saints have with CHRIST their Head as Members of his Mystical body, proved by the Scriptures and the Fathers. The Communion which the Saints have with one another evidenced and expressed in the blessed Eucharist. Of the Eulogia or Panes Benedicti sent from one Bishop to another in elder times to testify their unity in the faith of Christ. The salutation of the holy kiss how long it lasted in the Church, and for what cause abrogated. The name of Brothers and Sisters why used promiscuously among the Christians of the Primitive times. Of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Love Feasts in the elder ages. The readiness of the Christians in those blessed times not only to venture, but to lay down their lives for one another. Pleas for the community of the Estates studied by the Anabaptists, and refelled by the Orthodox. The natural community of mankind in the use of the creatures contrary unto Law and Reason, and to the pretensions also of the Anabaptists themselves. The Orthodoxy in this point of the Church of England. A general view of the communion which is between the Saints departed, and those here on earth. The Offices performed by godly men upon the earth to the Saints in Heaven. That the Saints above pray not alone for the Church in general, but for the particular members of it. The Invocation of the Saints how at first introduced. Prayers to the Saints not warranted by the Word of God, nor by the writings of the Fathers, nor by any good reason. Immediate address to Kings more difficult than it is to God. The Saints above not made acquainted in any ordinary way, with the wants of men: Arguments to the contrary from the Old Testament, answered and laid by. An answer to the chief argument from the 15. chapter of St. Luke. Several ways excogitated by the Schoolmen, to make the Saints acquainted with the wants of men; and how unuseful to the Papists in the present point. The danger and doubtfulness of those ways, opened and discovered by the best learned men amongst the Papists themselves. Invocation of the Saints, and worshipping of their Images a fruit of Gentilism. The vain distinctions of the Papists to salve the worshipping of Images in the Church of Rome. Purgatory how ill grounded on the use of Prayers for the dead. Prayers for the dead allowed of in the primitive times, and upon what reason. The ancient Diptyches what they were. The heresy of Aerius, and the Doctrine of the Church of England, concerning Prayer for the dead. Purgatory not rejected only by the Church of England, but by the whole Churches of the Greeks, and the ancient Fathers. The ireconcileable differences amongst the Papists, and the fluctuation of St. Augustine in the point of Purgatory.   

CHAP. V. Of the first Introduction of sin: God not the Author of it. Of the nature and contagion of Original sin. No actual sin so great, but it is capable of forgiveness. In what respect some sins may be accounted venial, and others mortal.  
Forgiveness of sins the first great benefit redounding unto mankind by our Saviour's passion. Man first made righteous in himself, but left at liberty to follow, or not to follow the ways of life. Adam, not God, the author of the first transgression; proved by the Scriptures and the Fathers. The heresy of the Cataphrygians, and of Florinus in making God the Author of sin; as also of Bardesenus and Priscilian, imputing sin to fate and the stars of Heaven. The impious heresy of Florinus revived by the Libertines. The Founder of the Libertines a member of the Church of Rome, not of calvin's School. Calvin and his Disciples, not altogether free from the same strange tenets. The sin of Adam propagated to his whole posterity. Original sin defined by the Church of England, and in what it specially consisteth. That there is such a sin as original sin, proved by the testimony of the Scriptures; by the light of reason; and by the Practice of the Church. Private Baptism why first used, and the use thereof maintained in the Church of England. Not the day of their birth, but of the death of the Saints, observed as Festivals by the Church, and upon what reasons. The word natalis what it signifieth in the Martyrologies. Original sin how propagated from one man to another; and how to children borne of regenerate Parents. The sin of Adam not made ours by imitation only, but by propagation. Of the distinction of sins in venial and mortal, and how far abominable. Equality of sins a Paradox in the School of Christ. No sin considered in its self to be counted venial; but only by the grace and goodness of Almighty God. No sin so great but what is capable of Pardon, if repented of; no not the murdering of Christ, nor the sin against the holy Ghost. Arguments from the holy Scriptures, as Heb 6.4, 6. and Heb. 10.26, 27. and 1 joh. 5.16. to prove some sins to be uncapable of pardon produced and answered. The proper application of the several places; with the error of our last Translators in the second Text.   

CHAP. VI Of the remission of sins by the blood of Christ, and of the Abolition of the body of sin by Baptism and Repentance. Of confession made unto the Priest, and the authority Sacerdotal.  
GOD the sole Author, Christ the impulsive meritorious cause of the forgiveness of sins. Remission of sins how and in what respects ascribed to the blood of Christ. Power to forgive sins conferred upon, and exercised by the Apostles. The doctrine of the Church of England, touching the efficacy of Baptism in the washing away of sin, confirmed by the Scriptures and the Fathers, and many eminent Divines of the reformed Churches. Baptismal washings frequently used of old, both by jews and Gentiles; as well to expiate their sins, as to manifest and declare their innocence. The waters of Baptism in what respect made efficacious unto the washing away of the guilt of sin. What it is which makes Baptism to be efficacious unto the washing away of sin. The rigour of the Primitive Church towards such as sinned after Baptism. The Clinici what they were, and how then esteemed of. The institution and antiquity of Infant Baptism. The old rule for determining in doubtful cases, how applied to this. Proofs for the Baptism of Infants, from St. Augustine up to Irenaeus, inclusively. What faith it is by which Infants are Baptised and justified. Of the necessity of Baptism, the want thereof how supplied, or excused in the Primitive times; and of the state of Infants dying unbaptised. Repentance necessary and effectual in men of riper years, for remission of sins. Confession in the first place to be made to God; satisfaction for the wrong done to be given to man. Satisfaction for sin, in what sense to be given to God, by the Penitent sinner. Private confession to a Priest allowed of and required by the Church of England. The Church's care in preserving the seal of confession, from all violation. Confession to a Priest defended by the best Divines of the Anglical Church, approved by the Lutherans, not condemned by Calvin. The disagreement of the Papists in the proofs of their auricular confession from the Texts of Scripture. The severity of exacting all particular circumstances, in confession, with the inconveniences thereof. That the power of sacerdotal Absolution in the opinion of the Fathers, is not declarative only, but judicial: and that it is so also both in the Doctrine and the practice of the Church of England.   

CHAP. VII. Of the Resurrection of the body, and the proofs thereof. The objections against it answered. Touching the circumstances and manner of it. The History and grounds of the Millenarians.  
THe resurrection of the body derided and contemned by the Ancient Gentiles. Proofs for the resurrection from the words of job, from the Psalms, and Prophets; and from the Argument of our Saviour in the holy Gospels. Our Saviour's Argument for the resurrection, against the cavils of the Sadduces, declared, expounded, and applied to the present purpose. Several Arguments to the same purpose and effect, alleged by St. Paul in his Epistles; and that too of the same numerical not another body. Baptising of or for the dead, a pregnant proof or argument for the resurrection; several expositions of the place produced, and which most probable. Baptising or washing of the dead, anciently in use amongst the jews, the Gentiles, and the Primitive Christians; with the reasons of it. Practical and natural truths for a resurrection. The resurrection of the same b●dy denied by Heretics; and justified with strong reasons by the Orthodox Christians. Two strong and powerful arguments for the resurrection, produced from the Adamant, and the art of Chemistry. That the dead bodies shall be raised in a perfect stature, and without those deformities which here they had; and in their several sexes also, contrary to the fancies of some vain disputers. Considerations raised on the Doctrine of the resurrection, with reference unto others and unto ourselves. The Doctrine of the Millenarians originally founded on some jewish dotages; by whom first set on foot in the Church of Christ, how refined, and propagated. The Millenarian Kingdom described by Lactantius, and countenanced by many of the ancient writers, till cried down by Hierome. The texts of Scripture on which the Millenarians found their fancies produced, examined, and loyed by as unuseful for them. The disagreement of the old Millenarians, in the true stating of their Kingdom.   

CHAP. VIII. Of the immortality of the soul, and the glories of Eternal life prepared for it; as also of the place and torment of hell. Hell fire not Metaphorical but real. The Conclusion of all.  
THe immortality of the soul asserted by the holy Scriptures; denied by some Heretical Christians, abetted and defended generally by the learned Gentiles. That the world shall have an end, and that it shall have an end by fire, proved by the old Poets and Philosophers. A place of everlasting rest and happiness designed by the learned both Greeks and Romans, for the souls of just and virtuous men to inhabit in; with a description of the place so by them designed. That the Patriarches, and other holy men of God were nourished in the hopes of eternal life, maintained by the Church of England and by the plain Texts of holy Scripture; denied by Servetus the whole Sect of the Anabaptists, and by some of our great Masters in the Church of Rome. Eternal life frequently promised in the new Testament, to the true believer; the several names by which it is presented to us, and the glories of it. That the Saints shall have a full knowledge of one another, in the state of glory, proved by clear evidence of Scripture. Several estates of glory and degrees of happiness amongst the Saints; proved by the Scriptures and the Fathers. The consideration of those glories of what great power and efficacy on a pious soul. Hell pains designed for the ungodly. Of Hades, Abyssus, Tartarus, and Gehenna (by which names both the place and names of Hell are represented in the new Testament): and what they do amount to being laid together. That the Scriptures mentioning hell fire, are literally not Metaphorically to be understood, proved by the word itself, by the authority of the Fathers, and the light of Reason. Arguments from the same topics, to prove the pains of hell to be everlasting; contrary to the fancies of latter Heretics. The end of all.    
FINIS.   

Addend. Fol. 453: lin. 37.  
— May believe in others. Nor doth it any way disagree with the Analogy of Faith, or the proceedings in like cases, that it should be so; that the confession of the Faith made by the sureties or sponsores (the Godfathers and Godmothers as we call them now) in the Infant's name, should be accepted by the Lord to the best advantage of the Infant, for whom they stipulate. Not to the Analogy of the faith; for find we not in the 7. Chapter of St. Luke that the Centurions sick Servant was healed by Christ of his bodily diseases, upon the faith of his Master only? And is it not expressly said, Mat. 9.2. that Christ pronounced the forgiveness of sins to the sick of the Palsy, upon the faith of them that brought him? which story we find more at large Mark 2.3. Luke 5.18. but all concentring on this truth, that it was not the faith of the sick-man, but of them that brought him, which did procure the sentence of Absolution, or Remission of sins, from the hands of Christ. Not with proceedings in like cases; for by the Laws, the Stipulation made by Sureties, or such as have the charge of Guardianship of Infants, made in their name and to their advantage, in the improvement or establishment of their Estates, is taken for as good and valid, as if it had been made by himself in his riper years. And of this we have a fair example in King james the sixth of Scotland, and the first Monarch of Great Britain, who was crowned King of the Scots, and received for such, upon the Oath of some Noble men, swearing and promising in his Name that he should govern that Realm and People according to the Laws established: which I find urged by that King in the conference at Hampton Court, in justification of the Interrogatories proposed to Infants in their Baptism, and of the Answers made thereto by the mouth of their Sureties. And to say truth, there is the same reason for them both; the Infant in the one case (which is that of Baptism,) being bound in conscience to perform that, when he comes unto riper years, which his Godfathers and Godmothers did vow and promise in his Name. And in the other case (which is that of civil contract or stipulation) he is bound by law to make that good, which in his name and for his benefit and advantage his Guardians or Curators had so undertaken.   

ERRATA.  
In the Epistle Dedicatory for already read clearly. In that to the Reader fol. 2. f. subsequent r. subservient. In the Preface●ol ●ol. 11. f. calling in r. casting in. f. creating r. preaching. f. decurrisse r. decursu. f. 21. f. mo●e r. promote. ●. new opinions r. no opinions. f. 21. f. consent r. consult.  
In the Book itself f. 2. f. traditio r. tradito. f. Evang r. ●xani. f. 17. f. Eubemerus r. Eubemerus. f. 20. f. fellows r. followers. f. 27. f. Numen r. Nations. f. 31. f. ne se r. ne sic. f. 34. f. his land r. his hand. f. 37. f. the name r. the means. f. 39 f. godly r. goodly. f. 41. f. compassion are r. compassionate. f. 42. f. in time r. in fine. f. 50. l. 52. f. powerful world r. powerful word. f. 52. f. materials r. immaterials. f. 73. f. Panaon r. Panarion. f. 76. f. Gigamire r. Gigantine. f, 81. f. repertimes r. reperiemus. f. 91. f. divinam r. divinatio. f. not to make r● not only to make. f. 93. f. may acts r. many acts. f. 95. f. justification r. institution. f. 96. f. been r. had been. f. 101. f. valendinem r. valeludinem. f. 104. f Galcalus Martius r. Galeatius Martius. f. 107. f. kindred r. children. f. 122. f. internal r. infernal. f. 139. f. suffered him r. suffered himself. f. these lazy lives r. the lazy lives. f. 152. f. doties r. does. f. 157. f. his r. this. f. 170. f. imuition r. intuition. f. 180. f. blind him. r. blind him. f. 197. for which the speaks of r. for which the Gospel speaks of. f. 200. f. skin r. shin. f. 202. f. Arius r. Aerius. f. 231. f. meuth. r. meath. f. 233. f. being then found out r. being not then found out. f. 234. f. I must confess r. to which I must confess. f. 240. f. by believing only r. by feeling only. f. 241. f. moral r. mortal. f. 246. f. descent r. desert. f. 251. f. Calendar r. Kalends. f. 269. f. how all this doctrine r. how ill this doctrine. f. 275. f. more than in there virtues read more in their virtues. f. 280. f. strongest r. strong. f. 282. f. happiness r. holiness. f. 294. f. the Priesthood r. the Priest stood. f. 305. f. transubstiated r. transubstantiated. f. on the r. in the. f. 308. f. certainly r. as certainly. f. 310. f. nor new. r. or new. f. 314. f. gravora r. graviora. f. to great r. to so great. f. 315. f. any other sight r. any other light. f. 315. f. day of days r. the days. f. 322. f. Loyal r. Loyola. f. 328. f. utraque r. utroque. f. 374. f. now give r. not give. del. application. f. 379. f. the same r. the name. f. 387. for consorti r. consortio. f. 401. f. in their baptism. r. in their infancy before baptism. f. 414. f. most high Ghost r. most high God. f. 391. f. Syrius r. Syria. f. 396. f. a siquidem r. siquidem. f. 397. f. Arminians r. Armenians. f. 398 f. convenientem r. convenientium. f. 416. f dum quo r. cum quo. f. suppetas r. suppetias. f. 456. f. declanative r. declarative. f. 453. f, an evitable r. unevitable. f. 471. f. inventute r. injuventute. f. 495. f. which continual r. with continual.   

THE SUM OF Christian Theology, Positive, Philological, and Polemical; CONTAINED IN THE Apostles CREED, Or reducible to it.  
IN THREE BOOKS.  
By PETER HEYLYN.  1 Joh. 5.7. 
There are three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word, and the holy Ghost; and these three are one.  
LONDON, Printed by E. Cotes for Henry Seile, over against St. Dunstan's Church in Fleetstreet, 1654.   

A PREFACE To the following Work, CONCERNING The ANTIQVITY & AUTHORITY OF THE CREED CALLED THE Apostles CREED: With Answer to the chief Objections which are made against it. The Drift and Project of the WORK.  
IT was a saying of St. Ambrose 
(a) Ambros. in Hexaemer. , Unus unum fecit qui unitatis ejus haberet imaginem; that God made only one in the first beginning, after the likeness or similitude of his own unity. The creation of the World was the pattern of Man, Man of the Church, the Almighty of all. Being one himself, or rather being unity, he bestowed upon the World not a being only, but his blessing with it, that being it should be but one. One in the general comprehension of parts, and therefore by the Grecians called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Latins call it universum, a name of multitude indeed, but of a multitude united. Universi qui in uno loco versi, say the old Grammarians. One also in opposition unto numbers, and so maintained by Aristotle in his first De Coelo, against the errors of Empedocles and Democritus, two old Philosophers. Now as he made the world but one, after the similitude of himself, so out of the world, and according to that pattern, created he man. Made by the Lord, according to his own image; and made but one, because the Lord was so that made him, because the world was so out of which he was taken. The several parts and members in him, do but commend the unity of the whole Compositum; for though they are many members, yet but one body 
(b) 1 Cor. 12.20 , saith St. Paul. Which mutual resemblance and agreement, as it occasioned many of the old Philosophers to call man an Abridgement of the world; so might it no less justly have occasioned others to style the world an enlargement of man. Nay more than this, seeing that only man was without an helper, the Lord resolved to make one for him; and to make her out of his own body only, that so he might preserve still the former unity. Nor stayed he here, but he did give her unto man to be one flesh with him, that to the unity of Original, he might add the union of affections. Magnum mysterium 
(c) Ephes. 5.32. , saith the Apostle, but I Speak only as he did, touching Christ and the Church. For this Creation of the woman, as St. Augustine tells us, was a most perfect type of the birth and being of the Church of Christ, Christum enim et Ecclesiam tali facto jam tunc prophetari oportebat 
(d) De Civit. dei. l. 22. c. 17. . The woman was created out of the side of man, at such time as the Lord had caused a deep sleep to fall upon him: the Church was also taken out of the wounded side of Christ, being cast into a deeper sleep than that of Adam. And as the woman was one body, both in the composition of her parts, and one with Adam both in the union of love, and unity of being; so is it also with the Church. She is at perfect union with him in the union of her affections, being married 
(e) Host 2.19.  unto him for ever; one with him in the unity of her original, for we are members of his body 
(f) Eph. 5.30. , and of his flesh, and of his bone: and lastly one in the consent and harmony of all her parts, acknowledging one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism 
(g) Eph. 4.5. . For though the Church consisted in those early days both of jews and Gentiles, Greeks and Barbarians, bond and free, men not alone of different countries, but of different natures, yet being all incorporated into that society of men which we call the Church, they make but one body 
(h) 1 Cor. 12.13  only, as St. Paul hath testified. And whence proceeds that unity of this visible body, but in that uniformity which all those several persons have which belong unto it, by reason of that one Lord, whose servants they do all profess themselves to be; that one Faith, of which they do all make confession; and that one Baptism, wherewith they are initiated into that society? the outward and uniform profession of these three things, which appertain to the very essence of Christianity, being necessarily required of each Christian man. Christians they neither are nor can be who call not Christ their Lord and Master. From hence it came that first in Antioch, and afterwards throughout all the world, all who were of the visible Church were called Christians. Author nominis ejus Christus 
(i) Tacit. Annal. lib. 15. , saith Cornelius Tacitus. But the bare calling of CHRIST JESUS our Lord and Master is not enough to prove us to be Christians, unless that we do also embrace that Faith which he delivered to his Apostles, and was by them delivered unto all the world. And though we are not reckoned members of this visible Church, till we receive admittance by the door of Baptism: yet is the door of Baptism opened unto none, until they make profession of their faith in Christ. It is not honesty of life, nor moral righteousness which gives denomination to a Christian (although the want thereof doth exclude from heaven) because they are not proper unto Christian men, as they are Christians; but do concern them, as they are men. The moral Law was given to mankind in the state of nature; and after promulgated to the jews in more solemn manner. Hence was it that so many of the ancient Gentiles (not to say any thing of the jews) before the coming of our Saviour were eminent in so many parts of moral virtue. But for the acts of Faith whereby we do confess that JESUS CHRIST is Lord of all things, and willingly believe all those sacred truths which he came to publish to the world; and by confession of the which, we carry as it were a key to the door of Baptism: that is the proper badge and cognizance of a Christian man, by which it is made known unto all the world, both to what Lord he appertaineth, and by what means he was admitted for a member of his house and family. Which faith, or rather the doctrines of which faith, being first delivered by our Saviour, with this comfort and reward annexed 
(k) Joh. 3.16. , that whosoever believed in him should not perish but have life everlasting; and after preached by the Apostles both to jew and Gentile: was finally committed unto writing to this end and purpose, that by reading it, or hearing it read and declared by others we may believe that JESUS is the CHRIST the Son of God, and that believing we may have life through his name 
(l) Joh 20.31. , as St. john assures us. And though this be affirmed by him of his Gospel only (I mean that written by himself) yet we may safely say the same of all the rest of the Apostolical and Evangelical writings, as being dictated by the same Spirit, writ by men equally inspired, and all conducing to this end, to teach us to know JESUS CHRIST, and him crucified, and to enable us to give a reason to all that ask of the faith that is in us.  
But being the writings of the Evangelists and Apostles were of too great a bulk to be committed unto memory, and that there were some things in them so obscure and difficult, that many ignorant and unstable 
(m) 2 Pet. 3.16.  (but well meaning) men both might and did wrest them to their own destruction; other things which related rather unto moral duties, then to points faith: it was thought fit by the Apostles to draw the points of saving faith, such as were necessarily to be believed of all Christian people, into a brief and narrower compass. It was not for the ordinary sort of men to trouble themselves with doubtful disputations 
(n) Rom. 14.1.  as St. Paul calleth them, whereof many do occur in his Epistles; disputes of too great difficulty and sublime a nature, for every man, especially the weak in faith, either to understand or conceive aright. Nor was it possible that men of mean parts and laborious callings, of which the Church consisted for the most part in the first beginning, should either have so much leisure as to read over their writings, or so much judgement as to gather and collect from thence what of necessity was to be believed that they might be saved, what not; or so much memory as to treasure up and repeat by heart, the infinite treasures of divine knowledge, which are comprehended in the same. And if it were so (as no doubt it was) when the Apostles and Evangelists had left those excellent Monuments of themselves in writing, which the Church hath ever since enjoyed; to which men might resort, as occasion was, for their information and instruction: how necessary then must we think it was, for some such summary and Abstract of the Christian faith to be resolved upon amongst them; which men of weak memories might repeat by heart, and men of shallow comprehensions rightly understand. Those blessed souls knew well, none better, how to apply themselves to the capacities of the weakest men; that there were many Babes in Christ, who were to be fed with milk and not with meats 
(o) Heb. 5, 13, 14. ; and that if they became not all things unto all men, they must resolve amongst themselves to save but few. Upon this ground (than which what juster could there be to induce them to it?) it is conceived they drew up that brief abstract of the Christian faith, which we call the CREED; and couched therein whatever point was necessary for all sorts of men, in all times, and all places of the world, both to believe in their hearts, as also to profess and confess upon all occasions, though to the apparent hazard of their lives and fortunes. And why this might not be that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that form of sound words, whereof St. Paul saith to Timothy 
(p) 2 Tim. 1.13. , Hold fast that form of sound words thou hast heard of me, I must confess that I could never yet see a convincing reason. Certain I am, that Irenaeus who lived very near the Apostles times, hath said of this confession of the faith, this Creed, which hath so generally and unanimously been received over all the world: Ecclesia per universum orbem usque ad fines terrae, 
(q) Iren. adv. haeres. l. 1. c. 2.  etc. The Church (saith he) throughout the world, even to the ends of the earth, received from the Apostles and their Disciples that faith which believeth in one God the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, etc. and in JESUS CHRIST the Son of God incarnate for our salvation; and in the holy Spirit, which preached by the Prophets the dispensation and coming of God; and the birth of CHRIST our Lord by the Virgin, his passion, resurrection and ascension with his flesh into heaven; and his coming from heaven in the glory of his Father, to raise up all flesh, and to give just judgement unto all. Which words lest possibly we might interpret of the doctrine of faith, which questionless was always one and the same over all the world, and not of any summary or abstract which they had digested for the use and benefit of God's people; or think that they relate rather to the substance of faith, then to any set and determinate form of words in which that substance was delivered: let us behold what the same Father hath delivered in another place 
(r) Id. ibid. c. 3. . This faith (saith he) which the Church though dispersed through the world received from the Apostles and their Disciples, yet notwithstanding doth it keep it as safe as if it dwelled within the walls of one house, and as uniformly hold (N. B.) as if it had but one only heart and soul; and this as consonantly it preacheth, teacheth and delivereth, as if but one tongue did speak for all. He adds 
(s) Iren. adv. hae●es. l. 1. c. 3. , which makes the point more plain, that though there be different languages in the world, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, yet the effect and sum of the tradition, (i. e. the faith delivered in that form) is one and the same: and I presume, he means not by tradition those doctrines of faith, which are delivered in the books and writings of the Evangelists and Apostles. Finally he concludes with this expression (and it is worthily worth our marking in the present case) that he amongst the Governors of the Church who is best able to speak, saith no more than this; and no less than this, the simplest and the most ignorant person: which certainly he had not said, but that there was one uniform and determinate order of words, which every one was bound to learn and adhere unto▪ Tertullian he speaks plainer yet, and affirms expressly 
(t) Tertull. de veland. Virgin. , regulam fidei unam omnino esse, solam, immobilem, et irreformabilem, that there is but one rule of faith at all, and that unmoveable and unalterable. How could he say that there was but one rule of faith in the Church, if every several Church had a several rule; or that it was unmoveable and unalterable, (as he saith it was) if there were no certain form of words prescribed which men were to keep to, but every one might change and alter as he saw occasion? So that I take it for a truth unquestionable, that in the first ages, nay the first beginnings of the Church of CHRIST, there was a certain form of words prescribed for the ease and benefit of the Church, a summary or abstract of the Articles of the Christian faith, drawn up as briefly and as plainly, but yet withal as fully as might stand with brevity; a constant rule or standard (Regula fidei, as Tertullian calls it) which both the people were to learn, and the Priests or Ministers to teach. And to this purpose it is said by Austin of the Creed or Symbolum, that it was simplex, breve, plenum, plain, short, and perfect 
(u) Aug. Serm. de Temp. 115. , simplicitas ut consulat rusticitati audientium, brevitas memoriae, plenitudo doctrinae; that so the plainness of it might comply with the capacities of the hearers, the shortness with their want of memory, the perfection or the fullness of it with their edification. Had any one of these been wanting, had it been plain enough to be understood, but too long and copious to be born in memory; or short enough to be remembered, but obscure and difficult, above the reach of ordinary apprehensions; or plain and short enough, but imperfect, maimed, and wanting in some points of principal moment; it had been no fit rule for the Church of CHRIST, produced no benefit at all, at least not worthy the divine Apostolical spirit, for the use of Christians.  
I know the age we live in hath produced some men (and those of special eminence in the ways of learning) who seem to bid defiance unto all antiquity; and will have neither Creeds nor Fathers, no nor ancient Counsels, to bear a stroke in any thing which concerns Religion. It is not long since that the Apostles Creed hath been out of credit, as neither theirs, nor anciently received by the Christian Church in that form we have it: but none have taken more unhappy pains in this fruitless quarrel, than one Down of Devonshire. Vossius hath lately writ a book De Tribus Symbolis, wherein he hath not only derogated from this of the Apostles, which others had quarrelled to his hand; but very unfortunately endeavours to prove, that that ascribed to Athanasius, and so long taken to be his by the chief lights for piety and learning in the Church of Christ, was not writ by him. Nor is he pleased with that form set forth and recommended to the Churches by the Council of Nice; for fear there should be any obligation laid upon men's consciences to believe otherwise then they list. And whereas it was thought till these subtler times, that the most certain way to interpret Scripture, was by the Catholic consent and commentaries of the ancient Fathers, so much renowned both in their own times and all ages since: they are now made so inconsiderable, such poor-spirited men; that truth will shortly far the worse, because they delivered it. Our Down, and after him one Dally a Frenchman, had not else beat their brains, and consumed their time, and stretched their wits unto the utmost, to make them of no use or credit, either in points of faith or controversy, as they both have done. The next thing that we have to do, is to cry down the Canon of the Scripture also: and as we have vilifyed the Creeds, Counsels, and Fathers, to make the fairer room for our own right reason, which is both Fathers, Creeds, and Counsels to our now great wits; so to reject the Scriptures also (as some do already) to make the clearer way for new revelations, which is the Paraclet, or the holy Ghost, of our present Montanists. To meet with this strange pride and predominant humour, I have most principally applied myself at this time of leisure; wherein (God help) it is not lawful for me to attend that charge in which God had placed me, to restore this ancient and Apostolic Creed to its former credit; and to expound the same, as it stands in terminis, according to the sense and meaning of those Orthodox and Catholic writers, which have successively flourished in the Christian world, and were the greatest ornaments of the age they lived in. For being free from prejudice and prepossessions, which do too often blind the eyes of the wisest men; and no way interessed in the quarrels which are now on foot, to the great disturbance of the Church and peace of Christendom: what men more fit than they to decide those Controversies which have been raised about the meaning of those Articles of the Christian faith, which are comprised in it, or deduced from it? So doing, I shall satisfy myself, though I please not others: and have good cause to thank this retreat from business, for giving me such opportunities to consult Antiquity, and thereby to inform my own understanding. For my part I have always been one of those qui docendo discunt, who never more benefit myself then by teaching others. And therefore though these Papers never see the light, or perhaps they may not, I shall not think I could have spent my time more profitably, then in this employment. So God speed me in it.  
To go back therefore where we left, exceeding necessary it was (as before was said) for some short summary or compendium of the Christian faith, to be agreed on and drawn up for the use of God's people; and that for these 3. reasons chiefly. First, to consult the wants and weaknesses of poor ignorant persons, such as were Novices in the faith, and but Babes in CHRIST; ut incipientibus et lactantibus quid credendum sit constitueretur 
(a) Aug. de fide & Symb. c. 1. , as St. Augustine hath it. Secondly, that there might be some standing rule, by which an Orthodox Teacher might be known from a wicked heretic, a Christian from an unbeliever; and to this end the Creed or Symbolum served exceeding fitly: Of which St. Austin gives this note, His qui contradicit aut a CRISTI fide alienus est, aut est haereticus 
(b) Id. in Encheirid a Laur. , that whosoever contradicts it, is either an Heretic or an Infidel. Thirdly, that people of all nations finding so punctual and exact an harmony in points of doctrine to be delivered by the Apostles, wheresoeoer they came, might be the sooner won to embrace that faith in which they found so universal and divine a consonancy; and be united with and amongst themselves in the bonds of peace, which is not to be found but where there is the spirit of unity. And who were able think you to prescribe a rule so universally to be received over all the world, so suddenly to be obeyed by all Christian people; but the Lords Apostles? Who else but they were of authority to impose a form on the Church of CHRIST, to be so uniformly held, so consonantly taught in all tongues and languages, as we find this was by Irenaeus; to be esteemed so unalterable and unmoveable, as this was counted by Tertullian; to be illustrated by the notes and Commentaries of the most glorious lights of the Christian firmament, St. Cyril, Chrysostom, Austin, and indeed who not? ●and finally to continue for so long a time as for 1600. years together, not only without such opposition as other Creeds have met with in particular Churches, but without any sensible alteration in the words and syllables? Assuredly such respects and honour had not been given to any humane rule or form, in the primitive times, not coming from the Lords Apostles; nor had it been a plant of so long continuance, had it not been both sown and watered by those heavenly hands, God himself giving the increase. But being reasons of this nature are not so prevalent with some men, as those which are derived from testimony, and the consent and general agreement of the ancient writers, who may best be credited in matters done so long ago: we will now show what was conceived in the best and purest times of Christianity, touching the Authors and occasion of this Creed or Symbol. The story whereof is thus delivered by Ruffinus, according unto that tradition which was then generally received in the Christian Church 
(c) Ruffin. in Symbol. . Tradunt Majores nostri, etc. Our Ancestors (saith he) have delivered to us by tradition, that when fiery tongues had fallen upon all the Apostles after CHRIST'S Ascension, by the coming of the holy Ghost, so that they could speak in several languages, and that there was no tongue so barbarous, which they understood not, they received commandment from above to travel every one into several nations, for the preaching and promulgating of the Gospel. Being therefore forthwith to depart from one another, they did agree upon a certain form of words, to be the rule and square of their future preachings, lest being separated far asunder, any the the least difference should appear amongst them in those things, which were to be communicated unto them whom they invited to the knowledge of eternal life. Omnes igitur in uno positi, & sancto Spiritu repleti, etc. To this end being all together with one accord, and all filled with the holy Spirit, they drew up a short Rule or form, whereby to regulate their doctrine (as before was said) which they composed by casting in every one his part, (as in a common shot or reckoning) and so agreed to give it for a rule unto all believers. And this (saith he) they called by the name of Symbolum, not without good reason. For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek doth signify both a sign or cognizance, and a contributing or conferring of many things together, to make up one. And they had framed this Abstract of the Faith to this end and purpose, that it might serve both for a character or mark, whereby the people might distinguish those false Apostles, which then began to scatter their pernicious doctrines in the Church of Christ, from such as preached the Gospel of our Lord and Saviour with an upright heart; as also for a sign or watchword to be kept amongst them, such as they had observed that Officers and Commanders in the wars did give unto their soldiers under their command, that being asked the word they might know the better whether the man they met with were a friend or enemy. And to the same intent and purpose they thought it best not to commit the same to writing, but only to imprint it in the hearts of the true believers; (lest otherwise it might haply fall into the hands of unbelievers) that no man might pretend to have learned it otherwise, but only ex traditione Apostolorum, from the Tradition of the Apostles. Thus, or to this effect Ruffinus. And to this relation we might add St. Augustine's, who doth not only say as Ruffinus doth, that the Creed was made by the Apostles, every one casting in his shot, or Symbolum 
(d) Aug. Serm. 115. de Temp. , whence it had that name; but doth assign to every one his several Article; according to that form and order which we have presented in the beginning of this Tractate, and therefore for avoiding needless repetitions shall omit it here. And though perhaps that Sermon may be none of Augustine's, as indeed many of those de Tempore, have been suspected to belong to some other Author: yet the Author whosoever he was, was of good Antiquity, and saith no more than what agreeth to that Tradition which hath been generally received in these Western Churches.  
And now I would fain know what one thing there is in this Narration of Ruffinus, to which the Writers of most fame and credit in the Primitive times do not give countenance. Is it, that the Creed was made by all the twelve Apostles, as he saith it was? S. Ambrose saith the same expressly 
(e) Ambros. Serm. 38. , Duodecem Apostolorum Symbolo fides sancta concepta est; the holy Faith, saith he, is conceived (or comprehended) in the Symbol of the twelve Apostles. St. Hierome though a bitter enemy to Ruffinus, and a man too indulgent to his own affections, yet notwithstanding that doth affirm the Creed to have been made by the Apostles 
(f) Hieron, Epist. ad Pammach. 61. ; and calls it, Symbolum fidei ab Apostolis traditum, in which after the confession of the holy Trinity, and unity of the Catholic Church all the mysteries of Religion are closed up with the Resurrection of the flesh (to eternal life). Pope Leo, (no worse man because Pope of Rome) comes more home to Ruffian; Catholici Symboli brevis & perfecta Confessio duodecem Apostolorum totidem est signata sententiis 
(g) Leo Epi. 13. ad Palcher. , that is to say, the short but full confession of the Catholic Creed, was made up of twelve sentences of the twelve Apostles. Is it that the Creed was not made upon that occasion of the Apostles being to depart from one another, as he saith it was, but rather in some time ensuing? St. Isidore of Sivil saith as much as he, Discessuri ab invicem, normam prius sibi futurae praedicationis in common constituunt 
(h) De Eccl. Officiis, l. 2 c. 3. ; that being ready to depart from one another, they agreed first together on a certain form to be observed in that which they should after preach in all parts of the world; to the end that nothing should be preached or proposed to those whom they brought unto the Faith of CHRIST, wherein was any difference to be found at all, so much as in appearance only. Rabanus Maurus, a man of good esteem for the times he lived in, in his second Book de institutione Clericorum 
(i) Cap. 56. , doth affirm the same. Or is it, that it had the name of Symbolum, from such a casting in of their several parts, as Ruffinus intimates? The word imports no less both in Greek and Latin; and every Schoolboy can inform us, that Symbolum dare 
(k) Terent. in Andria.  in the Comedy, is to pay one's shot, as at an Ordinary or other meeting of good fellowship. And so the Author of 115. Sermon de Tempore, inscribed to St. Augustine, (if it be not his, as for aught I can see, it may be) Quod Graece Symbolum, Latin Collatio nominatur. That, saith he, which is called Symbolum in Greek, is called Collatio in the Latin, that is to say, a contribution or casting in of many things together to make up one, by reason that the sum and substance of the whole Catholic Faith is contained therein; every Apostle casting in his Article in this manner following. Or is it, that it was intended for a mark or character by which to know an Heretic from a true Believer? Remember what was said out of Austin formerly, that whosoever contradicted that which was there delivered, Aut haereticus, aut a Christi fide alienus 
(l) Aug. Encheir. ad Laurent. , was either an Heretic or an Infidel. If none of these particulars may be justly quarrelled, it must be then that the Apostles thought not fit to commit it to writing, but left it to depend on tradition only. And yet St. Augustine saith the same. Catholica fides in Symbolo nota fidelibus, memoriaeque mandata, etc. 
(m) Id. lib. de fide & Symb. c. 1.  The Catholic faith contained in the Creed (saith he) so well known to all faithful people, and by them committed unto memory, is comprehended in as narrow a compass as the nature of it will bear. St. Hierome no great friend of Ruffians, as I said before, is more plain than he; who tells us that the Symbolum of our faith and hope delivered by Tradition from the Apostles 
(n) Epist. 61. ad Pammach. c. 9 ▪ Non scribitur in charta & atramento, sed in tabulis cordis, was not committed (in those times) to ink and paper, but writ in the tables of men's hearts. Irenaeus calls it in plain terms 〈◊〉 
(o) Lib. 1. c. 3. , which is the Greek word for Tradition; and Tertullian fetcheth it as high as from the first creating of the Gospel. Hanc regulam 
(p) Tertul. adv. Praxeam.  ab initio Evangelii decurrisse, as expressly he. Compare these passages of Irenaeus and Tertullian, whereof the first conversed with Polycarpus the Apostles Scholar, with that which is told us by Ruffinus of Majores nostri, that the relation which he makes came from the Tradition of their forefathers: and we shall find as strong, as constant, and as universal a Tradition for the antiquity and authority of the Creed in question; as for the keeping of the Lordsday, or the baptising of Infants, and it may be also for the names and number of the Books of Canonical Scripture. And yet behold two witnesses of more antiquity than Irenaeus and Tertullian. The first Ignatius 
(q) Ignat. Epist. ad Trallian. , one of the Apostles scholars, and successor unto St. Peter in the See of Antioch; who summeth up those Articles which concern the knowledge of CHRIST JESUS in his incarnation, birth, and sufferings under Pontius Pilate, his death and descending into Hell, his rising on the third day, etc. as they stand in order in the Creed. The second is Thaddeus 
(r) Euseb. Hist. l. 1. c. ult.  whom St. Thomas the Apostle sent to Abgarus the King or Toparch of Edessa, within few years after the death of our Redeemer; who being to instruct that people in the Christian faith, gives them the sum and abstract of it in the same words and method as concerning CHRIST, in which we find them in the Creed at this very day.  
Nor shall I fear to far the worse amongst knowing men for relying so far upon Traditions, as if a gap were hereby opened for increase of Popery. For there are many sorts of Traditions allowed of and received by the Protestant Doctors, such as have laboured learnedly for the beating down of Popery and all Popish superstitions of what kind soever. Chemnitius that learned and laborious Canvasser of the Council of Trent 
(s) Examen. Concil. Trident. sess. 4. , alloweth of six kinds of Tradition to be held in the Church: with whom agreeth our learned Field in his fourth book of the Church, and 20. chapter. Of these he maketh the first kind to be the Gospel itself, delivered first by the Apostles viva voce, by preaching, conference and such ways of lively expressions; Et postea literis consignata, and after committed unto writing, as they saw occasion. The second is of such things, as at first depend on the authority and approbation of the Church, but after win credit of themselves, and yield sufficient satisfaction unto all men of their divine infallible truths contained in them: and of this kind is that Tradition which hath transmitted to us from time to time, the names and number of the Books of Canonical Scripture. The third is that which Irenaeus and Tertullian speak of, and that saith he, is the transmission of those Articles of the Christian faith, quos Symbolum Apostolicum complectitur, which are contained in the Apostles Creed, or Symbol. The fourth touching the Catholic sense and interpretation of the Word of God, derived to us by the works and studies of the FATHERS, by them received from the Apostles, and recommended to posterity. The fifth kind is of such things as have been in continual practice, whereof there is neither precept nor example in the holy Scripture, though the grounds, reasons, and causes of such practice be therein contained, of which sort is the Baptism of Infants, and the keeping of the Lordsday or first day of the week, for which there is no manifest command in the Book of God; but by way of probable deduction only. The sixth and last sort is de quibusdam vetustis ritibus, of many ancient rites and customs, which in regard of their Antiquity are usually referred unto the Apostles: of which kind there were many in the Primitive times, but alterable and dispensable, according to the circumstances of times and persons. And of this kind are those Traditions spoken of in our Book of Articles 
(t) Articl. of 1562. Art. 134. , where it is said, that it is not necessary that Traditions and Ceremonies be in all places one, or utterly like, in that at all times they have been divers, and may be changed according to the diversity of countries, times, and men's manners, so that nothing be ordained against God's Word. So that the question between us and the Church of Rome, is not in this, as many ignorant men are made believe, whether there be or not any such Traditions as justly can derive themselves from the Apostles, or whether such Traditions be to be admitted in a Church well constituted. I know no moderate understanding Protestant, who makes doubt of either. The question briefly stated is no more but this, that is to say, whether the Traditions which the Church of Rome doth pretend unto, be Apostolical or not. Now for the finding out of such Traditions as are truly and undoubtedly Apostolical, there are but these two rules to be considered: the first, St. Augustine's, and is this 
(u) Contra Donat. l. 4. c. 23. , Quod universa tenet Ecclesia, that whatsoever the Church holdeth, and hath always held from time to time, not being decreed in any Council, may justly be believed to proceed from no other ground then Apostolical authority. The second rule is this, and that 
(x) Field l. 4. c. 21. 's a late learned Protestants, that whatsoever all, or the most famous and renowned in all Ages, or at the least in divers ages, have constantly delivered as from them that went before them, no man gainsaying or doubting of it without check or censure, that also is to be believed to be an Apostolical Tradition. By which two rules if we do measure the Traditions of the Church of Rome, such as they did ordain in the Council of Trent, to be embraced and entertained pari pietatis affectu, with the like ardour of affection as the written Word; What will become of prayer for the dead, and Purgatory, the Invocation of the Saints departed, the worshipping of Images, adoration of Relics, single life of Priests, and the like to these? Assuredly they are all so far from having the general consent of all times, that generally they have had the consent of none: no not so much as in the Church of Rome itself, till the candle of all good literature was put out by the night of ignorance. But for the Creed of the Apostles try it according to these rules, by both, or either, and it will evidently appear not only that it hath been universally and continually received in the Church for theirs; but that the most famous and renowned men of all times and ages have so received it from their Fathers, and recommended it for such to the times ensuing; no man gainsaying or opposing till these later times, in which the blessed Word of God cannot scape unquestioned. So that we have as much authority as the Tradition of the Church, the consent of Fathers, and the succession of all times can give us, to prove this Creed to have been writ by the Apostles, by them commended to the Churches of their several plantations, and so transmitted to ourselves without interruption. And no authority but divine, immediately declared from the God of heaven, is to be balanced with this proof, or heard against it.  
Thus having proved that the Creed was writ by the Apostles, and proved it by as great authority as any can be given by the Church of CHRIST, and the consent of the most renowned Writers of the Primitive times: Let us next see what reputation and esteem it carried in all parts of Christendom; and draw from thence such further arguments, as the nature of that search will bea●. And first, it is a manifest and undoubted truth, that as this Creed was universally received over all the world, ab ipsis Apostolorum temporibus, from the very times of the Apostles, as Vigilius hath it 
(y) Vigilius contra Eutych. l. 4. , without the least contradiction or opposition: so hath it passed from hand to hand for above these 1600 years, without alteration or addition. This we did touch upon before, but now press it further, and use it for another argument, that none but the Apostles, were or could be the Authors of it: and that if it had otherwise been esteemed of in the former times, it would have been obnoxious unto alterations, yea and to contradiction also, as others the most celebrated Creeds in the Christian world. It was the saying of Pope Gregory the Great, that he esteemed of the four first General Counsels, no otherwise then of the four Evangelists. And who is there, to whom the name of Athanasius and the Nicene Council, and the first general Council holden in Constantinople, is not most venerably precious? And yet the Creed of Athanasius hath found such sorry welcome in some parts of the world, as to be called either in dislike or scorn the Creed of Sathanasius 
(a) Hooker Eccles. Polit. l. 5. : and he himself condemned of extreme arrogance, if not somewhat worse, for imposing it upon the consciences of all Christian men, as necessary to their salvation. Non potuit Satan altius evehere humanam formulam 
(b) Apolog. pro Confess. Remon. ; as the Remonstrants please to phrase it. The Nicene Creed was of no long continuance in the Church of Christ, before these words secundum Scripturas 
(c) Durand. Rationale Divin. , according to the Scriptures, were added to the Article of the Resurrection. And to the Constantinopolitan the Churches of the West have added, Filioque, in another Article, and no mean one neither 
(d) Field of the Church, l. 2. c. 1. , that namely of the proceeding of the holy Ghost; without the leave and liking of the Eastern Prelates. The reason of which boldness is, because they are and were conceived to be humane formulas of Ecclesiastical constitution only, no divine authority; and therefore might be altered and explained, and fitted to the best edification of the Church. Whereas the Creed of the Apostles is come unto our hands without alteration, in the same words and syllables, as it came from them: none ever daring in the space of so many years to alter any thing therein, though many have applied their studies to explain the same. And this I make a second argument evincing the Authority and Antiquity of the sacred Symbolum, that men of most renown and credit for the times they lived in, did purposely apply their studies to expound this Creed, with as much diligence and care as any part, or most parts at least of the holy Scriptures. Witness the fourth Catechism of St. Cyril Bishop of Jerusalem, two of the Homilies of St. Chrysostom, some of St. Augustine's Sermons de Tempore, his two whole Tracts de fide & Symbolo, & de Symbolo ad Catechumenos: all principally made for explanation of this Creed: together with the Commentaries of Ruffinus, Maximus Taurinensis, Venantius, Fortunatus B. of Poitiers, ancient writers all, and all composed upon no other text or argument but this Creed alone. Not to say any thing at all of the learned works of many eminent men in the ages following and of the present times we live in, though otherwise of different persuasions in Religion. A thing which cannot be affirmed of the Nicene Creed, or any other Creed whatever: none of which have been commented, or scholied on, by any of the ancient Doctors of the Catholic Church, or of the disagreeing parties in the present times. And to say truth, there was good reason why this Creed should be thus explained, why such great pains should be bestowed to expound the same: it being a very ancient custom in the Church of CHRIST, not to admit any to the sacred Font, but such as made a public profession of their faith according to the words of this Creed, and understandingly recited it in the Congregation. Mos ibi servatur Antiquus apud eos qui gratiam baptismi suscepturi sunt, publice, i. e. fidelium populo audiente, Symbolum reddere 
(e) Ruffinus in Exposit. Symb. , so saith Ruffinus for his time of the Church of Rome; we may affirm the like for those of Antioch, Jerusalem, Africa, upon the credit of St. chrysostom, Cyril, Augustine, in their works now mentioned. Nor was it long before it was ordained in the Council of aged, Ann. 506. that in regard of the great confluence of all persons to the Church to receive the Sacrament of Baptism upon Easter day, the Creed should be expounded every day in the way of Sermons to the people, from the Sunday we call Palm Sunday to the Feast itself 
(f) Concil. Agathens. Can. 13.  Symbolum ab omnibus Ecclesiis ante octo dies Dominicae resurrectionis publice in Ecclesia competentibus praedicari, as the Synod hath it. Nay they conceived the learning of this Creed by heart so necessary in the former times; that it was first desired, and afterwards enjoined that all should learn it and retain it in their hearts and memories: who either were desirous to be counted good Catholic Christians, or to partake of any of the solemn offices in the Christian Church. St. Augustine commended it unto his Auditors, that for the better keeping it in memory, they should repeat it to themselves, Quando surgitis, quando vos collocatis ad somnum 
(g) Aug. Homil. 42. , both when they rose, when they betook themselves to sleep, or put on their clothes: and diligently learning and retaining of it, being commended also to all sorts of people, omnis aetatis, omnis sexus, omnisque conditionis 
(h) Conc. Foro-Iuliens. , by the Council holden in Friuli, Ann. 791. And by a Canon superadded unto those of the last of the three Ecumenical Counsels holden in Constantinople, it was expressly ordered by the Fathers there, not only that no person should be admitted unto Baptism or to Confirmation, or to stand Godfather for any in those sacred Acts, (except infants only) who could not say the Creed and Lords prayer without book 
(i) Apud Binium. Tom. 3. par. 1. l. 1. p. 262. : but also Catholicum esse non posse, that he who was so negligent in the things which did so nearly concern him in the way of his salvation, could not be a Catholic. And yet this was not all the honour, nor were these all the marks of difference which were put upon it, to set it high in estimation above other Creeds. For whereas that of Nice, and Athanasius, were ordered to be said or sung but at special times, according to the usages of particular churches: it was decreed by Damasus who sat Pope at Rome, A. 370. or thereabouts, that the Apostles Creed should be repeated every day in the public Liturgies 
(k) Durand. Rational. Divin. , on the Canonical hours of prayer. And whereas it was ordered by Pope Anastasius, that at the reading of the Gospel, not the Priests only and the Ministers but all people present, venerabiliter curvi in conspectu Evangelii starent 
(l) Anast. apud Platinam, & in Collect. Concil. , should stand upon their feet, and bow down their bodies, as in the way of veneration: it was not long before the same gesture had been taken up (for I find not that it was imposed by public Sanction) at the reading also of the Creed, as being the sum and substance of the holy Gospels. Et cum Symbolum est verbum Evangelicum quoad sensum, ergo illud stando sicut Evangelium dicitur 
(m) Durand. Rational. Divin. , as Durandus hath it. The like authority it had in all general counsels, in which it is usual to be recited (as Baronius 
(n) Baron. Annal. Eccl. A. 44.  very well observeth) quasi Basis et fundamentum totius Ecclesiae structurae, as the foundation and groundwork of the whole Ecclesiastical edifice: and this he proves out of the acts of the Counsels of Chalcedon, Ephesus, and Constantinople, whither I refer you. Finally, as this Creed is sometimes called the Creed without any addition, the Creed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or by way of eminence, all other being called for distinction sake, the Constantinopolitan, the Nicene, the Creed of Athanasius, or the Creed of Damasus: so was this anciently esteemed the one and only Creed devised for the general use of all the Church, the rest being only made as Expositions or as Comments on it, upon occasion of particular and emergent heresies. And so much Perkins doth confess 
(o) Perk. Exposition of the Creed. , though he be otherwise persuaded of the Authors of it, than had been taught him by the greatest and most eminent Writers of the Primitive times.  
For against this that hath been said many Objections have been studied both by him and others, to make the Creed of latter standing, and of less authority. And first they say, that if the Creed were indeed framed by the Apostles in that form of words, in which it is come unto our hands 
(p) Id. ibid. , it must be then a part of the Canonical Scriptures, as the residue of their writings are: which also I find granted, and I wonder at it, in our learned Bilson. The Creed (saith he) we do not urge as undoubtedly written by all the Apostles, for than it must needs be Canonical Scripture 
(q) B. bilson's Survey. p. 664. . Which being said, he answereth himself in the words next following, where he affirmeth that it is the best and perfectest form of faith, delivered to the Christians at the first planting of the Gospel by the direction of the Apostles and by their Agreement. If so, if it was framed by their direction and agreement, it is as much to my intent, as if it had been written by them all together, it being not their pen, but their authority and consent which makes it be entitled to them, and called Apostolical. St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans were not else Canonical, because written by the hand of Tertius as it is said, Rom. 16.22. And as to the conclusion which is thence inferred, I answer that not every thing which was writ by the Apostles, or by any of them, was ipso facto to be called canonical Scripture, because writ by them: but only that which they committed unto writing, by the dictamen and direction of the holy Ghost, with an intent that it should be Canonical, and for such received. For otherwise the Epistles of St. Paul to Seneca (supposing them for his, which I here dispute not) and all the letters of intercourse betwixt them and their private friends, of which no question need be made but they writ many in their time as occasion was, (had we the copies of them extant) must have been Canonical, as well as those upon record in the book of God. And this is that which we find written by St. Austin 
(r) August. de doctr. Christian. , Quicquid ille de suis dictis factisve nos scire voluit, hoc illis scribendum tanquam suis manibus reposuit: and in another place to the same effect, Deus quantum satis esse judicavit locutus 
(s) Id. de Civit. l. 11. c. 3. , scripturam condidit. His meaning in both places doth amount to this, that whatsoever God conceived to be fit and necessary for the edification of his Church, he did impart to the Apostles; and when he had communicated so much as was fit and necessary, he closeth the Canon of the Scripture: not giving way that any thing should be added to it as the word of God, but that which he did so communicate and impart unto them. It is objected secondly, that in the Primitive times it had not any exact form at all, but that the Fathers varied in the repetition of the heads thereof 
(t) B bilson's Survey. p. 664. : and to this end, Ignatius, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen, and others of the ancients are brought in as witnesses; but prove no such thing. All that can be collected from those ancient writers, is no more than this, that many times, the Fathers as learned men and great discoursers use to do, enlarge the words and syllables of the Creed, as they saw occasion, the better to deliver the true meaning of it: and sometimes they contract into fewer words the whole sum thereof, as thinking it not pertinent to the present purpose, to tie themselves unto the words. Which appears plainly by Tertullian, who doth acknowledge that there was but one only Creed, or set rule of faith, affirmed by him to be unalterable and unchangeable: yet having three occasions to repeat the heads thereof, doth vary every time in the words and phrases. And yet it cannot be inferred upon these variations, that at the first, or rather in the Primitive times, the Creed had no exrct form at all, or not the same in which it is retained now in the Christian Church: no more than any man can say, that there was never any exact form of the Nicene Creed, commended by that Council to the use of the Church; because that in the Council of Chalcedon, and in the works of Athanasius and St. Basil, it is presented to us with some difference of the words and phrases. Of which the most that can be said must be that of Binius 
(u) Binuis in Annot. in Concil. Tolet. IU. Tom. Concil. 2. part. 2. , idem est plane sensus, sed sermo discrepans, i. e. that the sense is every where the same, though the words do differ. In the third place it is objected, that the Creed could not be written by the Apostles, because there are therein certain words and phrases, which were not used in their times 
(x) Perk. Exposition of the Creed. : and for the proof of this they instance in these two particulars, first in our Saviour's descent into hell, which words they say are not to be found in all the Apostolical Scriptures; and secondly in that of the Catholic Church, which was a word or phrase not used, till the Apostles had dispersed the Gospel over all the world. And first in answer to the first we need say but this, that though these words of Christ descended into hell, be not in terminis in the Scriptures, yet the Doctrine is: which we shall very evidently evince and prove, when we are come unto the handling of that Article. And if we find the doctrine in the book of God, I hope it will conclude no more against the authority and antiquity of the Creed we speak of, then that the word Homoousion in the Nicene Creed, did or might do against the authority of that Creed or Symbol, because that word could not be found in all the Scriptures, as was objected by the Arians in the former times. And for the second instance in the word Catholica, there is less ground of truth therein, then in that before. But yet because it hath a little show of learning, and doth pretend unto antiquity, we will take some more pains than needed, to manifest and discover the condition of it. Know then that the Apostles might bestow upon the Church the adjunct of Catholic, before they went abroad into several Countries to preach the Gospel; not in regard that it was actually diffused over all the world, according as it hath been since in these later Ages: but in regard that so it was potentially, according to the will and pleasure of their Lord and Saviour, by whom the bar was broken down which formerly had made a separation between jew and Gentile, and the Commission given 
(y) Mar. 16.15.  of Ite & praedicate, to go and preach the Gospel unto every creature. Catholic is no more then universal. The smallest smatterer in the Greek can assure us that. And universal questionless the Church was then, at lest intentionaliter, & potentialiter, when the Apostles knew from the Lords own mouth, that it should no longer be imprisoned within the narrow limits of the land of jewry, but that the Gentiles should be called to eternal life. Without this limitation of the word I can hardly see how the Church should be called Catholic in her largest circuit: there being many Nations, and large Dominions, which are not actually comprehended within the Pale of the Church, to this very day. I hope their meaning is not this, that there was no such word as Catholic, when the Apostles lived and composed the body of the New Testament. If so they mean, although they put us for the present to a needless search, yet they betray therein a gross piece of ignorance. For the discovery whereof we may please to know that the word Catholic is derived from the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which signifieth in universum (as that from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is totum, all) as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. e. that I may sum up all in brief. And so the word is used by Isocrates, that famous Orator 
(z) Isocrat. in Orat. ad Nicoclen. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. that is to say, generally, or in a word I shall endeavour to declare what studies it were fittest for you to incline unto. But the proper signification of it is in that of Aristotle 
(a) Aristol. Analytic. prior. , where he opposeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a general, or universal demonstration, to that which he calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that which is partial only, or particular. Hence comes the adjective, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. e. universal, and so the word is taken by Quintilian, saying, 
(b) Quintilian l. 2. cap. 13.  Propter quae mihi semper moris fuit quam minimum me alligare ad praecepta quae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vocant, i. e. (ut dicamus quomodo possumus) universalia vel perpetualia. Thus read we in Hermogenes an old Rhetorician, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of usual and general forms of speech, and thus in Philo speaking of the laws of Moses, 
(c) Philo de vita Mofis l. 3.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that he ordained a general & perpetual law for succession into men's inheritances. Take which of these three senses they best like themselves, and they will find at last it comes all to one. If the word Catholic do signify the same with universal, it also signified the same in and before the times the Apostles lived in: and how the Church might then be called universal, we have shown already. If they desire rather to translate it general, Pope julius will tell us how the Church might be called General, in the first days and hours thereof: 
(d) julii Etist. decretal. c. 8.  Quia sc. generalis est in eadem doctrina ad instructionem, because it generally proposeth the same doctrine for edification: or if by that of perpetual rather, there is no question to be made but that our Saviour's promise to be with them to the end of the world 
(e) Mat. 28 20. , did most sufficiently declare unto them that the Church which they were to plant was to be perpetual. There is another meaning of the word Catholicus, as it denotes an Orthodox and right believer; which whether it were used in the Apostles times may be doubted of: it being half granted by Pacianus an ancient writer 
(f) Paci. Epist. 1. ad Symp. , sub Apostolis CHRISTIANOS non vocari Catholicos, that Christians were not then called Catholics. But this at best, being not the natural, but an adventitious meaning of the word, according to a borrowed metaphorical sense; it neither helps nor hinders in the present business, and in this sense we shall speak more of it hereafter, when we are come unto the Article of the Catholic Church. One more objection there remains (and but one more which is worth the answering) and is that which is much pressed by Downes 
(g) Downs of the Authors and Authority of the Creed. : namely that to affirm, as Ruffinus doth, that the Apostles did compose the Creed to be the rule or square of their true preaching, lest being separated from one another there should be any difference amongst them in matters which pertain to eternal life; were to suppose them to be guided by a fallible spirit, and consequently subject unto Error. For answer whereunto, we need say but this, that the difference which Ruffinns speaks of 
(h) Ruffinus in posit. Symb. , and which he saith the Apostles laboured to avoid by their agreement on this sum or abstract of the Christian Faith; related not to points of doctrine, which could not but be every where, at all times, the same, because all guided by the same infallible spirit; but only to the form of words wherewith they were to cloth and express those doctrines, which if not in all points the same might amongst many simple and illiterate people be taken for an argument of a different faith. Whereas the consonancy which all Churches held with one another, not only in the Unity which they maintained amongst themselves in point of judgement, but also in that uniformity wherewith they did express that consent in judgement: was a strong evidence no doubt to the weak and ignorant, who are governed more by words then matters that the Faith wheresoever they traveled was in all parts the same, because they found it every where expressed in the self same words. So that for aught appeareth by these shifts and cavils, the CREED may still retain the honour which of old was given it; and be as it is commonly called, The Apostles Creed.  
The next thing that I have to do is to resolve upon the course and order which I mean to follow, in the performance of the work I have undertaken. And here I shall declare in the first place of all, that as the main of my design is to illustrate and expound the Apostles Creed; so I shall keep myself to that Creed alone, and not step out into those intricate points of controversy, which principally occasioned both the Athanasian and the Nicene Creeds. For though I thank God I can say it with a very good conscience, that I believe the doctrine of the holy Trinity, according to the Catholic Tradition of the Church of CHRIST: yet I confess with all, (such is the want and weakness of my understanding) that I am utterly unable, (as indeed who is not?) to look into the depths of so great a mystery; and cannot but cry out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (as the Apostle did in another case) Oh the unsearchableness, the depth of this heavenly Oeconomie! What then I am not able to inform myself in, those things wherein I am not able to content and satisfy my own poor, shallow understanding; how can I hope so to express in words or writing, as to give satisfaction and content to a mind more curious? Id fides credat, intelligentia non requirat, was anciently the Father's rule 
(k) Lact. l. 2. c. 9 , and shall now be mine. In matters of so high a nature, I believe more, than I am able to comprehend (the gift of faith supplying the defect of mine understanding) and yet can comprehend more by the light of faith, than I am able to express. So that I shall not meddle in this following Tractate; with the eternal generation of the Son of God, or any of those difficult but divine sublimities, which are contained in the Creed of the Nicene Council: nor with the manner of the holy Ghosts procession, whether from the Father only, or from the Father and the Son; nor how God can be one in three, and three in one. Such lofty speculations and sublimities of so high a nature, I leave to be discussed and agitated by men of larger comprehensions and more piercing judgements than I dare challenge to myself: resting contented with those mediocrities, which God who gives to every one his several Talon, hath graciously vouchsafed to bestow upon me. In other points I shall make use sometimes of such explications, as the Athanasian or the Nicene Creeds do present unto me: which I shall handle rather in a Scholastical, and if occasion be presented in a Philological way also, than a way merely Catechetical, or directly practical, wherein I see so many have took pains already: taking along the stating and debating of such points of Controversies, as either naturally do arise from the words themselves, or may be very easily deduced from thence, on good and logical deductions. And in such points of Controversy as shall here be handled, as also in such Observations as shall be here amassed together; I chiefly shall rely on the Ancient Fathers, whose reputation and authority is most precious with me: but so that I shall now and then make bold, as I see occasion, to spoil the Egyptians also of their choicest jewels, for the adorning of this body of Divinity, which I had brought into the forge since my first retreat, and is now ready for the Anvil. St. Paul esteemed it no disparagement to his holy doctrine, to strengthen it with reasons drawn from the best Philosophy, to prove and press it home in a Logical way; and to adorn it with the dictates of three old Greek Poets, Menander, Aratus, and Epimenides, whose testimonies he makes use of in three several places 
(b) Act. 17.28. 1 Cor. 15.33. & Tit. 1.12. . As long as Hagar doth submit herself to her mistress Sarah, and not contend for the precedency with her; so long she is and may be serviceable in the house of Abraham. And humane literature, especially in relation unto Paganish errors, is of as necessary use as she, in the Church of God, if it conform unto the Scripture, and be guided by it; and do not bear itself too high on the conceit and reputation of its own great excellencies. But for the main of this discourse, I shall especially repose my determination, on the authority and general consent of the Fathers, as before I said▪ not meddling with the Protestant Writers of the foreign Churches, but when a doubt is to be cleared which concerns themselves; nor often with the Writers of this Church of England, but when I have occasion to inquire into such particulars, as must be proved to be the true intent and doctrine of this CHURCH by law established. The holy Scriptures are the main foundation which I am to build on, according to that sense and interpretation which have been given us of them by the holy Fathers, and other Catholic Doctors of the Church of Christ, who lived before the truth degenerated into Popish dotages; and whose authorities and judgements I conceive most fit for the determining of such Controversies which are now on foot, as being like to prove most indifferent Umpires, because not any way engaged in our present quarrels.  
I know that Down, Dalie, and others of great parts and wit have laboured to disclaim them as incompetent Judges, not to be trusted in a business of such main concernment, as the determination of the controversies in the Church of Christ; out of an high conceit of their own great worth, which is not willing to acknowledge a superior eminence. And I know well that many, if not most of our Innovators, whether it be in point of Discipline or Doctrine, decline all trial by the Fathers, Counsels, and other the records and monuments of the Catholic Church; because directly contrary to their new devices. But all this moves not me a jot, nor makes me yield the less authority to their words and writings. The Church of England waves not their authority, though some of her conceited children, and others of her factious ones have b●en pleased to do it. Witness that famous challenge made by Bishop jewel 
(m) B. jewels challenge. , by which the several points in issue between the Church of England and the Church of Rome, were generally referred to the decision of the Ancient Fathers; with great both honour and success. Witness these words of Peter Martyr, a man of great employment in the REFORMATION of the Church, and sent for hither by Archbishop Cranmer to mote it here. 
(n) Pet. Mart. de votis & coelebat.  In judging things obscure (saith he) the Spirit, there are two ways or means for our direction; whereof the one is inward, which is the Spirit, the other outward or external, the Word of God: to which (saith he) Si Patrum etiam autoritas accesserit, valebit plurimum, If the authority of the Fathers do come in for seconds, it will exceedingly avail. And unto this agrees Chemnitius also, though of a different judgement from him in some points of doctrine; who having told us of the Fathers, that we may best learn from their own words and sayings, what we may warrantably conceive of their authority; gives in the close thereof this note, and a sound one 'tis, 
(a) Chemnit. Examen. de Tradition. c. 6.  Nullum dogma in Ecclesia novum, & cum tota antiquitate pugnans recipiendum, that is to say, that new opinion which seems new, and is repugnant to the general current of Antiquity, is to be entertained in the Church of God. What is decreed herein by the Church of England, assembled representatively in her Convocations; what by the King and three Estates convened in Parliament; we shall see anon. In the mean time take here the judgement of the Ancients in this very case. 'Tis true indeed the Fathers many times and in sundry places humbly and piously have confessed the eminency of Canonical Scriptures above all the writings of men whatsoever they be; for which consent St. Augustine contr. Faust. Manic. l. 11. c. 5. de Baptismat. contr. Donatist. l. 1. c. 3. & Epist. 19 & in Proem. lib. de Trinitate: desiring liberty of dissent from one another when they saw occasion, and binding no man to adhere unto their opinions, further than they agreed with the Word of God delivered by the holy Prophets and Apostles, which have been since the world began, 
(p) August. Epist. 19  De quorum Scriptis, quod omni errore careant dubitare nefarium est, and of whose writings to make question whether or not they were free from error, were a great impiety. And this is that whereof St. Hierome speaks in an Epistle to Pope Damasus, Ut mihi Epistolis tuis sive tacendarum sive dicendarum Hypostase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 n detur autoritas 
(q) Hieronyn. ad Damas. Epist. 57 , that he might be left to his own liberty either in using or refusiug the word Hypostasis. But than it is as true withal, that Vincentius give it for a rule, 
(r) Vincent. Lirin. adv. haeres. c. 38.  Multorum & magnorum consentientes sibi sententias Magistorum sequendas esse, that the ancient consent of godly Fathers is with great care both to be searched into and followed in the Rule of Faith. And 'tis as true, that having moved this question in another place, that if the Canon of the Scripture be so full and perfect, and so abundantly sufficient in itself for all things, Quid opus est ut ei Ecclesiasticae intelligentiae jungatur autoritas? what need there is that the authority of Ecclesiastical interpretations should be joined with it 
(s) Id. ibid. c. 2. ? returns this answer in effect, Lest every man should wrest the Scriptures to his own private fancy, and rather draw some things from thence to maintain his errors, then for the advancement of the truth. Of the same resolution and opinion was St. Augustine also, who though he were exceeding careful upon all occasions to yield the Scriptures all due reverence: yet he was willing therewithal to allow that honour which was meet, both to the writings of the Fathers which lived before him; and to the Canons and Decrees of preceding Counsels; and to submit himself unto their Authorities. For speaking of General Counsels, he subjoins this note, Quorum est in Ecclesia saluberrima autoritas 
(t) Augustin. in Epist. 118. , that their authority in the Church was of excellent use. And in another place alleging the testimonies of Irenaeus, Cyprian, Hilary, Ambrose, and some other Fathers, he concludeth thus. Hoc probavimus autoritate Catholicorum sanctorum, &c. 
(u) Id. contr. julian. Pelagi. l, 2.9. , This we have proved by the authority of Catholic and godly men, to the end that your weak and silly novelties might be overwhelmed with their only authority; with which your contumacy is to be repressed. (He speaks this unto julian a Pelagian Heretic). And 
(x) Id. ibid. c. 10.  with these testimonies and authorities of such holy men, thou must either by God's mercy be healed (i. e. recovered from his error) or else accuse the famous and right holy Doctors of the Catholic Church; against which miserable madness I must so reply, that their faith may be defended against thee, even as the Gospel itself is defended against the wicked and professed enemies of Christ. More of this kind might be produced from the Ancient Writers. But what need more be said in so clear a point, especially to us that have the honour to be called the children of the Church of England, who by a a Canon of the year 1572 doth bind all men in holy Orders, not to preach any thing in their Congregations, to be believed and holden of the people of God, but what is consonant to the doctrine of the Old and New Testaments 
(y) Canon. An. 1571. cap. de Concionator. ; Quodque ex illa ipsa doctrina Catholici Patres & Veteres Episcopi collegerint▪ and had been thence concluded or collected (take which word you will) by the Catholic Fathers, and ancient Bishops of the Church. The like authority and respect is given to the first four General Counsels by the unanimous vote and suffrage of the Prince and three Estates convened in Parliament, in the first year of Queen Elizabeth of famous memory 
(z) An. 1. Eliz. cap. 1. , wherein it was ordained or declared rather amongst other things that nothing should be deemed or adjudged Heresy in the Kingdom of England, but what had been adjudged so formerly in any of the said four General Counsels, or any other General Council determining the same according to the Word of God, etc. Where we may see that the Estates in Parliament did ascribe so much to the authority of those four Counsels, and the judgement of the Fathers which were there assembled; as not to question any thing which they had determined concerning heresy; or to examine whether it agreed with God's Word or not: but left the people of this Kingdom totally to repose themselves upon their authority, and to take that for heresy without more ado, which they judged to be so. And so I close this point with those words of Saravia, a learned man, and one that stood up stoutly in this Church's cause, against the innovating humours which was then predominant (though not so high as in these times of Anarchy); 
(a) Saravia de divers. ministerii gradibus.  Qui omnem Patribus adimit autoritatem, nullam relinquit sibi: that is to say, He who depriveth the Fathers of their due authority, will only teach Posterity to give none to himself. And having thus asserted the authority of the Creed which I have in hand, declared the course and purposes of this following work, and shown you what grounds I am especially resolved to proceed upon: I shall with the assistance of God's gracious Spirit fall roundly to the work itself, taking the Articles in order as they lie before me.  
And yet before I shall descend unto particulars, I think it not amiss to add the testimony and consent of Calvin to that which is before delivered touching the Authors and authority of this common Creed; according as I find it in an old Translation of his Book of Institutes, (for I have not the Original now by me) printed at London in the year 1561. And thus saith he 
(b) Calvin Inst l. 2. c. 16. sect. 1●. : Hitherto I have followed the order of the Apostles Creed, because whereas it comprehendeth shortly in few words the chief Articles of our Redemption, it may serve us for a Table, wherein we do distinctly and severally see those things that are in Christ worthy to be taken heed unto. I call it the Apostles Creed, not over carefully regarding who were the Authors of the same. It is verily by great consent of old Writers ascribed to the Apostles, either because they thought it was by common travail written and set out by the Apostles, or for that they judged that this Abridgement being faithfully gathered out of the doctrine delivered by the hands of the Apostles was worthy to be confirmed by such a Title. And I take it to be out of doubt, that from whence soever it proceeded at the first, it hath even from the first beginning of the Church, and from the very time of the Apostles been used as a public Confession, and received by the consent of all men. And it is likely that it was not privately written by any one man, for as much as it is evident that even from the farthest age it hath always continued of sacred authority and credit among all the godly. But that which is only to be cared for we have wholly out of controversy, which is, that the whole History of our Faith is briefly and well in distinct order rehearsed in it, and that there is nothing contained therein which is not sealed with sound testimonies of the Scripture. Which being understanded, it is to no purpose either curiously to doubt, or to strive with any man, who were the Authors of it; unless perhaps it be not enough for some man to be assured of the truth of the holy Ghost, but if he do also understand either by whose mouth it was spoken, or by whose hand it was written. So he And this is very much for one, who was no greater Champion of the ancient Farmulas'.   

THEOLOGIA VETERUM: OR, THE SUM OF Christian Theology, Positive, Polemical, and Philological; CONTAINED IN THE Apostles CREED, Or reducible to it; According to the tendries of the Ancients both GREEKS and LATINS.  
THE FIRST BOOK.  
By PETER HEYLYN.  Heb. 11.6, 3. 
He that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.  
Through faith we understand that the Worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.  
LONDON, Printed by E. Cotes for Henry Seile, 1654.   

ΣΥΜΒΟΛΟΝ ΤΩΝ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. Symbolum Apostolicum secundum Graecos.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.   

Symbolum Apostolicum secundum Latino's.  
St. PETRUS. 
1. Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem,  St. JOHANNES. 
2. Creatorem coeli & terroe:  St. JACOBUS. 
3. Credo & in jesum Christum filium ejus unicum, dominum nostrum.  St. ANDREAS. 
4. Qui conceptus est de Spiritu sancto, natus ex Virgin Maria,  St. PHILIPPUS. 
5. Passus est sub Pontio Pilato; crucifixus, mortuus, & sepultus.  St. THOMAS. 
6. Descendit ad inferos; tertia die resurrexit a mortuis.  St. BARTHOLOMAEUS. 
7. Ascendit in coelos; sedet ad dextram dei Patris omnipotentis:  St. MATTHAEUS. 
8. Ind venturus judicare vivos & mortuos.  St. JACOBUS ALPHAEI. 
9 Credo & in Spiritum sanctum; sanctam Ecclesiam Catholicam;  St. SIMOE ZELOTES. 
10. Sanctorum communionem, remissionem peccatorum,  St. JUDAS JACOBI FR. 
11. Carnis Resurrectionem.  St. MATHIAS. 
12. Et vitam aeternam, Amen.    

ARTICLE I. Of the First ARTICLE OF THE CREED Ascribed to St. PETER. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. i e. Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem. i e. I believe in God the Father almighty.  

CHAP. I. Of the name and definition of Faith; the meaning of the Phrase, in Deum credere; the Exposition of it vindicated against all exceptions.  
HAving thus vindicated the Authority of the common Creed, and intimated the design and project of this present work: I now proceed unto the Explication of it, and every branch and Article therein contained, as they lie in order: beginning first of all with that which testifieth our Faith and belief in him, which is the first of all beginnings. A jove principium, was the rule of old; and a more excellent Rule then that who can teach us now? But first, as a Praecognitum unto all the rest, I must insist upon the nature and interpretation of the first word of it, which hath a special influence and operation over the whole body of the Formula, and giveth denomination to it. For from the Latin Credo, comes the name of Creed; from the first English word, which is I believe, we call the whole the Articles of our belief; and so the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, comes from the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which in the Ecclesiastical notion of it, we interpret Faith. So that in whatsoever language we behold the same, the the word is verbum operativum, as the Lawyers call it 
(b) Coke in calvin's case.  a word which hath relation unto every Article, to every branch and member of the whole Compositum; as, I believe in God the Father Almighty, I believe in jesus Christ his only Son, I believe that jesus was conceived of the holy Ghost, I believe that he was born of the Virgin Mary, I believe that he suffered under Pontus Pilate; & sic de caeteris. And first for the quid nominis, of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, it signifieth to assent, or to join credit or belief to such things as are laid before us. As, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the old Poet Phocylides, 
(c) Phocylid. sentent.  that is to say, give no credit to the talk of the common people, who are unconstant and uncertain in their words and actions. Derived it is from the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which we render faith; and that from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the praeterpluperfect tense of the passive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which signifieth to be persuaded, to be taught, to be induced to give assent unto such propositions as are made unto us. Thus is the word used by the great Apostle, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. 
(d) Rom. 8.38.  For I am persuaded that neither life nor death, etc. shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ jesus our Lord. And again, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. 
(e) Philip. 1.6.  Being confident of this very thing, (Persuasum habens hoc ipsum, as Beza very properly doth translate the word) That he which hath begun a good work in you, will perform it till the day of jesus Christ So that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we render faith, being hence derived, may not unfitly be construed a persuasion, or a firm assent, persuasionem seu firmam assensionem, 
(f) Valla in Annotat. in N. Test.  as the learned Valla hath observed; and then the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being brought from thence, will signify in the true and proper notion of it, I am persuaded verily of the truth of that which so many godly and religious men have related to me, and give as full and firm an assent unto it, as if I had been present when the deed was done. Thus also for the Latin word Fides, the Etymology thereof is drawn from fio, from the doing or performance of those things which are said or promised. Fides enim dicitur (saith Cicero) eo quod fiat quod dictum est. And therefore faith, or fides, call it which you will, as it relates unto the promises of God, is defined by Zanchius, to be firma & certa persuasio de promissionibus dei 
(g) Zanch. de Natura Dei. c. 3. , a strong and confident persuasion that God will graciously fulfil those promises which he hath pleased to make unto us. And therefore I shall fix upon that definition of the thing itself, which I find amongst the Ancient Schoolmen, affirming it to be a firm assent to supernatural truths revealed. Which definition lest it should far the worse for the Author's sake, is backed and seconded by so many learned men both of the Protestant and Reformed Churches, as may well serve to set it free from all further cavils: For thus Melanchthon for the Protestant or Lutheran Churches, Fides est assensus omni verbo Dei nobis tradito 
(h) Melancht. in Exam. Artic. de justificatione. . Faith saith, he, is an assent to the veracity or ●ruth of the whole Word of God delivered to us. And so saith Vrsin for the Doctors of the French or Calvinian party, defining it almost in the self same words, 
(i) Vrsin. in Exposit. precept 1.  to be Vera persuasio qua assentimur omni verbo Dei nobis tradit●o. With these agree Chemnitius in Evan. Concil. Trident. cap. de justificatione. Pet. Martyr, ad Rom. 3. v. 12. Polanus Partit. Theolog. lib. 2. pag. 368. besides divers others. Which being the true and proper definition of belief, or faith, according to the natural meaning of the word both in Greek and Latin: I may conclude from hence without further trouble, that to believe (according as the word here stands in the front of the Creed) is only to be verily persuaded of the truth of all those points and articles which are delivered in the same; and to give a firm assent unto them, agreeable unto the measure of our understanding.  
Faith thus defined, differeth not only from experience, knowledge, and opinion, all which do come within the compass of Assents, in general; but from all other things whatsoever, which come within the compass of our belief. When we assent unto the truth of such things, or matters as are discernible by sense, we may call it perception or experience: as when a man assents to this proposition, that ice is cold, or that fire is hot, because he feels it to be so by his outward senses. If our assent be weak, unsettled, or grounded only upon probabilities, we then call it opinion: in matters of which nature men are for the most part left at liberty, their understandings being neither convinced by the power of a superior truth, nor settled and confirmed by demonstrative proofs. This though it be an assent, is no firm assent; and therefore nothing less than Faith. If our assent be grounded on demonstrative proofs, and built upon the knowledge of natural causes, it is then termed Science, or knowledge, properly so called: for, Scire est per causas scire 
(k) Arist. in lib. Demonstrat. , said the great Philosopher. But he that gives assent unto any truth, only because of the authority of the man that speaks it, neither examining his proofs, nor searching into the probabilty or possibility of the thing related: that man, in true propriety of speech, is said to believe: and to believe (we know) is the act of faith. Thus it is said of the Samaritans, that many of them believed on him for the saying of the woman which testified (thus of him, viz.) He told me all that ever I did 
(l) Joh. 4.39.41, & 42. : but more believed because of his own words when they had heard him speak, and observed his doctrine. And yet not every truth believed on the speakers credit, is the proper object of belief, or faith, according as we use the word in the Schools of Christ, but only supernatural truths, such truths as our depraved nature could not reach unto, without revelation from above: by consequence not the authority of every speaker, but only of such holy men of God, who spoke as they were moved by the holy Ghost 
(m) 2 Pet. 1.21. , is the foundation of this faith, which we here define. I give belief unto the Histories of Xenophon, Thucydides, Polybius, and Corn. Tacitus; because I hold a good opinion of the men that writ them. And I believe that Edward the Black Prince won the battle of Crecie, being then but 18 years of age, and that King Henry the fifth subdued the greatest part of France within five or six years, because I find it so related, without contradiction, both by our English Chroniclers, and the French Historians. But I rely on no humane authority, how great soever it be, for a rule of Faith: which as it hath truths only supernatural for the object of it; so have those truths, or the revelation rather of those truths, no other Author than the Spirit of God. So then faith is a firm assent, which makes it differ from opinion, which may be called an assent also, but weak and wavering. It is a firm assent to truths; for to believe in lies is not faith but folly. A brand or character set on those by Almighty God, who seeing they would not receive the love of the truth that they might be saved; have been, and are given over unto strong delusions, and to believe in lies, that they should be damned 
(n) 2 Thes. 2▪ 10, 11, 12. . 'Tis an assent to truths revealed, not grounded on demonstrative proofs, or the disquisition of natural causes, or the experiment of sense; but only on the authority of him who reveals it to us: which differenceth it most clearly both from experience and from knowledge, which have surer grounds: And finally it is a firm assent to truth supernatural, and supernaturally revealed; which makes it differ from that credit or belief, (call it which you will) which commonly we ascribe and give to humane authorities: which being but humane must needs be fallible, and therefore no fit ground for our faith to rest on, according to the notion of that word in the Church of Christ. For though both knowledge and experience rest on surer grounds, as to the satisfaction of the understanding, to which a demonstration is of more authority than an ipse dixit; that being a convincing argument which commands assent, this but artificiosum argumentum, as Logicians call it: yet are the grounds of faith less fallible, than those of any other Art or Science whatsoever it be, because they are communicated to us by the Spirit of God, qui nec fallere nec falli potest, who being infallible in himself will most infallibly lead unto all those truths, the knowledge of the which is either necessary or expedient for us.  
'Tis true, St. Paul lays down another definition, or description rather, of belief, or faith; which he defines to be Substantiam rerum sperandarum, argument. non apparentium 
(o) Heb. 11.1. , that is to say, The substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen: Which definition or description we will first explain; and then declare, to what acception of the word Faith, it relates especially. Now the first thing to be considered in this definition, is the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which the Vulgar Latin rendereth by Substantia? Beza more like a Paraphrast, Illud quod facit ut extent quae sperantur. Which being so obscure as to need a Commentary, he helps our understanding with a marginal note, and calls it su●si●tentiam rerum quae sperantur, 
(p) Beza in Heb. c. 11. v. 1.  which is the true meaning of the word in its natural sense. For faith is therefore called the subsistence (or the existence, as the word is sometimes translated) of things hoped for, because it makes those things which are yet in hope, and are no otherwise ours then in expectation, subsistere in cord nostro quasi ante oculos corporis 
(q) Haymo in Heb. c. 11. v. 1. , to subsist or exist no l●ss really in our hearts, or souls, then if we saw them present with our bodily eyes. And this he doth illustrate by the Resurrection, which is not passed already 
(r) 2 Tim. 2.18.  as some Heretics taught, nor come as yet, as to the accomplishment and performance of it: and yet faith makes it to subsist or exist in the mind of a Christian, ac si prae oculis eam habeamus 
(s) Haymo in Heb. c. 11. v. 1. , as if we were already possessed thereof. The word hath other senses in the holy Scripture, as in the third chapter of this Epistle to the Hebrews, where we find 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, initium substantiae, as the Vulgar reads it, principium illud quo sustentamur, as more truly Beza, 
(t) Heb. 3.14.  The beginning of our confidence, say our last Translators: where that which in the Greek is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is Englished confidence, according as we find it also Psal. 39 where that which by the Septuagint is translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) is in our English rendered hope; Surely my hope is even in thee. vers. 7. Budaeus that most learned Critic in the Greek tongue, will, have it signify courage, or praesentiam animi, 
(u) Budaeus in Comment. Gr. Linguae.  deriving it from the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies to sustain or endure a shock; in which regard that Soldier is called miles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, who stands his ground, and will not turn his back unto his adversary. And in this sense we find it also in St. Paul's Epistle unto those of Corinth, twice meeting with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(x) 2 Cor. 9.4. & 11.17. , an unmoved constancy in boasting, or praefidentem gloriationem, as Beza renders it, that is to say, a glorying that will not shrink, or be put out of countenance. Which also very well agrees with the nature of faith, and serves most fitly to express the full vigour of it, by which a man is made assured and confident in all times of danger, and scorns to give ground, or to turn his back, though Principalities and powers, and all the rulers of the darkness of this present world 
(y) Ephes. 6.12.  were armed against him. The second thing to be observed in this definition, or description rather, which the Apostle hath laid down in the place aforesaid, is the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the evidence of things not seen, as the English reads, Beza translates it, quoth demonstrat; the Vulgar Latin, Argumentum: and both these say the same though in divers words. Arguere dicebant antiqui ostendere, a quo venit argumentum, quasi ostensio. The old Grammarians, saith Haimo, used the word Argue in that sense which we use the word to declare and show 
(z) Haymo in Heb. 11. v. 1. . And, Argumentum proprie ratio est, qua quis rei dubiae facit fidem; an argument, saith he, is the proof or evidence whereby a doubtful matter is confirmed and ratified. And then the meaning of St. Paul will be briefly this, Fides est ea credere quae non videntur 
(a) Id. ibid. , faith makes us to believe such things as we never saw, and are not subject to our senses: the mind being so convicted with the evidence of divine authority, as to submit itself or to give assent to every thing which is delivered in the holy Scriptures, even touching the invisible things of Almighty God, 
(b) Rev. 1.20.  as the Apostle calls them in the first to the Romans. But then we must observe withal, that this is not a proper definition of faith itself, according to the rules of Art, & the true character and nature of a definition: but rather a description of the fruits and effects of faith, in that it represents those things which are yet in hope, as if they were possessed already; and doth so clearly look into things invisible, as if they were before our eyes. And this, saith Beza on the place, 
(c) Beza in Heb. c. 11. v. 1.  Excellens fidei descriptio ab effectu est, quod res adhuc in spepositas repraesentet, & invisibilia veluti oculis subjiciat. So then, we may define Belief or Faith, as before we did, St. Paul's description notwithstanding, to be a firm assent to supernatural truths revealed: which doth most fully manifest the true nature of faith, and no way crosseth that which St. Paul delivereth. For that faith represents the things hoped for, and is the evidence or proof of things not seen; is an effect or consequent of that firm assent to supernatural truths revealed, which worketh both that evidence and existence in us. It follows thereupon, as we before said, that to believe, according as the word here stands in the front of the Creed, is only to be verily persuaded of the truth of those points and Articles as are delivered in the same, and to give a firm assent unto them, according to the measure of our understanding.  
This being thus stated and determined, we now proceed unto the explication of the first Article, I believe in God the Father Almighty: that is to say, I believe that there is one Immoratal and Eternal Spirit, of great both Majesty and Power, which we call God; and that this God is the Father Almighty, the Father both of jesus Christ and of all mankind, who as a Father hath not only brought us into the world, but hath provided us of all things necessary both for body and soul, protecting us by his mighty power, and governing us and our affairs by his infinite wisdom. This is the sum of that which is to be conceived of this present Article of our belief in God the Father Almighty. I know the Schoolmen do distinguish very frequently between Credere Deum, Credere Deo, & Credere in Deum: the first whereof they make to be a general belief of the being of God, that is to say, that God is, that there is a God; the second an affiance or relying on the veracity or truth of that which he hath pleased to impart to us in the holy Scriptures; the last (which is the phrase here used) a confidence which we have in his grace and goodness, a casting of ourselves entirely into his mercy and protection. For thus the Master of the Sentences, lib. 3. distinct. 23. cap. illud est; & Thomas Aquinas, 2.2 qu. 2. Ant. 2. ad 1. & 4. the Author of the Ordinary Gloss. Rom. 4.5. Durandus in Rationale divin. cap. de Symbol. and indeed who not? And I know also that this nicety is generally fathered on Augustine, who indeed makes a signal difference between credere Deo, & credere in Deum. Credere in Deumutique plus est quam credere Deo 
(d) August. in Psalm. 77.  to believe in God, is more, saith he, then to believe that which the Lord hath spoken. Of which he gives this instance in another place, Nam & daemons credebant ei, at non credebant in eum 
(e) Id. in johan. tract. 29. ; for the Devils do believe what God saith unto them, who cannot for all that be said to believe in God. And finally he concludeth, or the Schoolmen from him, that when we say, I believe in God, we do not only say, I believe God is, or I give credit to his words, but me ipsum amare, & credendo in eum ire, & membris ejus incorporari 
(f) Compend. Theol. lib. 5. c. 21. , by believing to love him, by believing as it were to grow into him, and be incorporate with his members. The Protestant Doctors many of them go the same way also, making the Credo of this place, to be the same with Fiduciam in Deo colloco, the placing of our whole trust and confidence in God Almighty 
(g) Zuinglius in Matth. 23.13. , which are Zuinglius words: with whom agree, as to the meaning of the phrase, P. Ramus de Relig. l. 1. c. 2. Zanch. de tribus Elohim part. 1. lib. 4. cap. 7. & lib. 5. c. 2. Amesius in Medulla. Theol. lib. 1. cap. 3. num. 15. besides divers others, whose names it were impertinent to remember here. By these in Deum credere, to believe in God, is made the highest and most excellent act or degree of faith; the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or full assurance of the understanding, which St. Paul speaks of Coloss. 2.2. higher then which a Christian cannot go in this present life. Tertia fidei pars, vel gradus, as we read in Musculus, non modo de Deo, & Deo, sed & in Deum credere 
(h) Muscul. loci common. loco de Fide. n. 3. . And this he doth define to be, Spem omnen in Deum dirigere, firmaque fiducia ab illius bonitate pendere: making it so peculiar unto God alone, ut nec Moysi, nec Prophetis, nec Apostolis, imo ne Angelis quidem debeat accommodari; that it is neither to be used when we speak of Moses, or of the Prophets, or Apostles, no nor of any of the Angels. Finally for the phrase itself, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which the Apostles have made use of in this place of the Creed, and in other parts of Divine Writ, they make it an expression or form of speech so proper to the holy Ghost, that neither the Septuagint in their Translation, nor any learned Author amongst the Grecians ever used the same 
(i) Wotton de Reconcil. Peccat. part. 1. lib 2. c. 14. n. 3. . Which notwithstanding I am yet unsatisfied in the solidity and truth of the said distinction, and also of the explication of the phrase here used. And therefore with the leave of the learned Reader, and with all due respect to those Reverend men, who have transmitted them unto us; I shall endeavour to evince these two conclusions: first, that the phrase in Deum, or in Christum ●redere, the explication of the phrase in Deum credere, and the distinction thereon founded, is not so generally and universally true as it is pretended; And 2. that howsoever it may be admitted in some texts of Scripture, in which that phrase is used by the holy Ghost, it can by no means be admitted in this place of the Creed.  
First, for the phrase in Deum, or in Christum credere, they make it signify (as before I said) that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or full assurance which a Christian hath of the love of God, the confidence which we have in his love and goodness, the casting of ourselves entirely into his goodness and protection: which I conceive is more than the phrase importeth, or was intended by it in the holy Ghost. The only place in which we find this form of speech in St. Matthews Gospel, is in the 18. chap. vers. 6. where it is said, Whosoever offendeth any of these little ones, (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, qui credunt in me) which believe in me, it were better that a millstone were hung about his neck, etc. In which place, by those little ones, or pusilli, which our Saviour speaks of, he neither meaneth little children, nor men small in stature, (they must needs wrest the words too far, who do so expound them) but men weak in faith; such as he elsewhere calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(k) Mat. 8.26. , men of little faith. And certainly a weak faith, or a little faith, cannot consist with that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that full assurance and persuasion which is by them intended in the phrase in question. Or if they mean it literally of little children, because they find 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, parvulum, a little child 
(l) Mat. 28.2 etc. , to be a great part of the argument of that discourse, either they, must mean somewhat else by in Christum credere, than their explication of the phrase admits of, or else confess that little children are endued with that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that confidence in the love and goodness of Almighty God in jesus Christ, which is the highest pitch and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the strongest faith; which I think no wife man will affirm. Thus is it said of the Disciples in the second chapter of St. john, that when they had seen the miracle which jesus did in Cana of Galilee, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 crediderunt in eum, they believed on him. ver. 11. Assuredly the faith of the Disciples at this time was but weak and wavering, and needed many signs and miracles to confirm the same. Magna vero Christi indulgentia, quod pro Discipulis habet in quibus tam pusilla est fides 
(m) Calvin in joh. cap. 2. v. 11.  And this, saith Calvin on the place, declares the goodness and indulgence of our Saviour Christ, who would admit such men to be his Disciples, in whom there was so little faith. And yet these men, in whom there was so little faith, are said in eum credere to believe in him; because upon the sight of so great a miracle, tun● demum se illi addicere coeperunt, they first began to fasten a more close dependence on him. The like is said of the Samaritans, that on the same raised of our Saviour by the woman, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, multi in eum crediderunt, many of them believed in him 
(n) Joh. 4.39. . And this the holy Ghost hath reported of them, before they heard our Saviour speak, or had so much as seen his person, believing in him, at that time on no other ground, then propter verbum mulieris, for the saying of the woman only. Now if the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of a Christian faith be so firmly grounded, Vt non possit vel seductorum versutia, vel Tyrannorum violentia, vel ulla machinatione Diaboli expugnari, that neither the fraud of Heretics, nor the violence of Tyrants, nor all the machinations of the Devil can prevail against it, as Bishop Davenant saith it is 
(o) Davenant in Coloss. 2. v. 2. , and exceeding rightly: either it must have better grounds than the words of a woman, a woman of an ill name and a scandalous life, (for such she is described to be vers. 18.) or else when the Samaritans are said to believe in Christ, propter verbum mulieris, only upon this woman's words; the phrase imports no such assurance, no such strength of faith, as hath been formerly supposed. In the same Gospel of St. john we find it written also, that many of the chief Rulers, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, crediderunt in eum, believed in him, cap. 11. v. 42. but than it follows thereupon, that because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the Synagogue 
(p) Joh. 11.42 . Here is a Credere in eum, accompanied with a very weak faith, (Quanta in illis fidei imbecilli●as 
(q) Calvin in joh. cap. 11. v. 42. , as it is in Calvin) a faith that durst not show itself by any outward confession, or look abroad into the world for fear of the Pharisees. And therefore credere in eum, in that place (as in those before) is no more but this, as Calvin notes it, Christo n●men dare, & doctrinam ejus amplexos esse, to profess the faith of Christ, and embrace his Gospel. The like may be affirmed also of the blind man in the 9 chapter of St. john, who was required to believe on the Son of God, when he was fain to ask this question, Quis est Domine ut credam in eum? i e. Who is ●e Lord that I might believe on him? vers. 36. and of the jailer in the Acts, of which more anon. Besides that which in all these places, and in many others, is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in Ch●is●um credere, in other places of the Scripture, is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in nomen ejus credere, As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Nempe iis qui credunt in nomen ejus 
(r) Joh. 1.12. , even to them that believe in his Name; that is to say, to them that do believe on him. And yet we find it said of some, when they saw his miracles, that they believed on his Name, in Nomine ejus 
(s) Joh. 2.23. , (or in Nomen ejus, as Beza more near unto the Greek) whom yet our Saviour never held to be true Disciples (pro germanis Discipulis non habuit, as it is said by Calvin 
(t) Calv. in locum. cap. 2. v. 23. , but slighted them as light and inconsiderable men. And therefore it is said of them in the following words, Non credebat eis semetipsum 
(u) Joh. 2.24. , that he did not commit himself unto them, because he knew the falsehood and hypocrisy which was within them. So that by looking over so many of those texts of Scripture in which this form of speech is used, it is more than manifest, that the Explication of the same before delivered is not so generally and universally true, as hath been pretended. Let us next see what ground there is for the distinction which is founded on it.  
And first, whereas it is affirmed of this form of speech, that it is so peculiar unto God alone, that it is not to be used of any creature, neither of Moses nor the Prophets, nor of men or Angels 
(x) Muscul Loci common. de fide. ; I hold this to be gratis dictum, a building without good foundation. Those which are learned in the Hebrew have long since noted, that where the Affix 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beth is added to the word which signifieth credere, to believe, it doth import as much as in: and that whereas we read in all late Translations, the people feared the Lord, and believed the Lord and his servant Moses 
(y) Exod. 14. v. 31. , the words in the Original will bear this translation, that they believed in the Lord, and in Moses his servant. Musculus doth acknowledge this 
(z) Muscul. ut supr. , and granteth that the words may be thus translated, Et crediderunt in Dominum & in Mosen servum ejus, and that the words do bear this sense; though Hierom, as he saith, haud inconsulto, not without good reason and advice did thus change the same, Et crediderunt Domino & Moysi servo ejus; which hath been since retained in the Latin Bibles, and in all National Translations that I have met with. So also, when God said to Moses, Lo, I come unto thee in a thick cloud, that the people may hear when I speak with thee, and believe thee for ever 
(a) Exod. 19.9. : the words in the Original, as before they did, do bear this construction, (and Musculus doth so translate them) Et etiam in te credant in seculum; that the people may for ever believe in thee. But being after changed by Hierom, because in aliquem credere, much about his time began to be esteemed a solecism in the Christian Grammar; in stead thereof, we have Et credat tibi in perpetuum, both in the Vulgar Bibles, and all late Translations. Conform unto which phrase in the Original, Crediderunt in Dominum & in Mosen, St. Basil a most learned Father of the Greek Church, speaking of the jews, saith that they were baptised in Moses (or in the name of Moses, and believed in Moses: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(b) Basil. de sancto Spiritu. c. 14. , as his own words are, Baptizati sunt in Mosen, & crediderunt in illum, as it is turned by his Translator. Nor is this said of Moses only, the principal Founder, under God, of the jewish Church, as a man more in grace with Almighty God, than any of the sons of men since his time have been, but of the Church of CHRIST in general. For in the Greek copies of the Apostles Creed, it is said expressly, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is to say, I believe in the holy Catholic Church: and in the Nicene Creed it was said of old, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. e. Credo in unam Catholicam Ecclesiam, as the Translator of Socrates 
(c) Socrat. hist. Eccles. l. 1. c. 25. , where that Creed occurreth. And though the same be not expressed in terminis in the Latin Creed, yet in the Grammar of the words it is understood. For where the Latin Creeds run thus, Credo in Spiritum sanctum, sanctam Catholicam Ecclesiam, etc. that is to say, I believe in the holy Ghost, the holy Catholic Church, etc. as the English hath it: either the word Credo must be interposed, as Credo in Spiritum sanctam, credo sanctam Catholicam Ecclesiam, i. e. I believe in the holy Ghost, I believe the holy Catholic Church; or else the Preposition In, must relate to both, as also to the rest that follow. I know indeed, that after Credere in Deum, or in jesum Christum, was thought to be a different act and degree of faith, from Credere Deo, or jesu Christo: that men began to think it somewhat inconvenient, to say as formerly, Credo in sanctam Catholicam Ecclesiam, or Credo in Mosen & Prophetas, I believe in the holy Catholic Church; or, I believe in Moses and the holy Prophets which have been since the world began. And so we are to understand both Ruffian 
(d) Ruffin. in Exposit. Symboli.  and Paschasius 
(e) Paschas. de Spirit. sancto. lib. 1. , when they speak thereof, both fitting their expressions to such forms of words as were then authorized in the Schools of CHRIST. The like is to be said of St. Augustine also, viz. Credimus Paulo, non credimus in Paulum, etc. 
(f) August. in joh. tractat. 29. . We believe Paul (saith he) we believe not in Paul; and we believe Peter, we believe not in Peter: Where note, the Father speaks not of the property, but of the use of the phrase, according to the language of the times he lived in: for ab initio non fuit sic, that it was otherwise intended at the first beginning, we have shown already. Whether the phrase be so peculiar an expression of the holy Ghost, as that it is not to be found in the old Greek Writers, I will not meddle at the present: though I conceive the holy Ghost did dictate nothing of the Scriptures, but the matter only, and left the language thereof to the sacred Penmen. But for the Septuagint, although they do not use the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 preceding an Accusative Case, (which is the singularity of expression so much insisted on in this business) yet use they other words to the same effect. For those which stand so highly on singularity cannot choose but grant 
(g) Wotton de Reconcil. Peccat. part. 1. l. 2. c. 14.  that many times they use 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, not seldom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and sometimes also though not often 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: which whosoever should translate in the English tongue, could not translate it otherwise, then thus, to believe in God: So that whether it be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. e. Credo in Deum, or Credo in Deo, it makes no difference in this case: no more, then that these words of the Evangelist 
(h) Joh. 2.23.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by Beza are translated Crediderunt in nomen ejus, but by the Author of the Vulgar, in nomine ejus; which come both to one. This makes it evident in part that the said distinction between Credere Deo, & credere Deum, stands not upon so sure a ground as was imagined; but I must make it yet more evident, that in the true intent and meaning of the sacred Penmen, there is no difference at all to be found between them. For in the 16. chapter of the Acts, the jailor did demand of Paul and Silas, what it behoved him to do that be might be saved; vers. 30. to which they made this following answer, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Crede in Dominum jesum Christum, etc. believe on the Lord JESUS CHRIST, and thou shalt be saved and thy house 
(i) Act. 16 31. . It followeth thereupon in the sacred story, that being instructed in the Word, and baptised with water, he rejoiced greatly, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Credens Deo, as both Beza and the Vulgar read it; Believing in God with all his house; vers. 34. where if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the 34. be not the same with that of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the 31 verse, as to the act of faith, which is one in both, although the Object of this Act be given us in a different manner; the jailor had fallen short of that way to Heaven; and possibly might have been as far from the hopes of Salvation, as when he first proposed the question. And if they be the same, as no doubt they be, then Credere Deo, & Credere in Deum, differ not at all: and therefore neither the distinction, nor the Explication, so generally true, and universally to be embraced, as hath been supposed, which was the first thing to be proved.  
The second was, that howsoever Credere in Deum in some texts of Scripture may possibly admit that explication which is made thereof; yet can it not be possisibly admitted in this place of the Creed. My reason is, because all Novices or Catechumeni, which were to be admitted into the Church, by the door of Baptism; all children formerly baptised, which either came or were brought before the Bishop for Confirmation; were first to give an account of their faith, to make a public profession or confession of it in the face of the Church, according to the very words and Articles of this common Creed. For which see proof sufficient in the former chapter. Now if by Credere in Deum, & in jesum Christum, the Church intended such a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, such an adhaesion unto God in JESUS CHRIST, such an assurance and persuasion of our interest in him, as the phrase is pretended to import: the Church did very ill to exact it from the hands of Novices, or from the mouths of babes in Christ; considering how strong the meat was, and how agreeable unto the stomach of the strongest faith. My second reason is, (which before was touched at) because if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to believe in God the Father Almighty, in jesus Christ his only Son, and in the holy Ghost, the Lord and giver of life, import no less than such a dependence on them as is due from the Creature to his God; and that too ex vi Phraseos, out of the very prhase or form of speech in Deum credere: the same dependence must all Christians have upon the Church, the same on the Communion of Saints; and the rest that follow. Will you have a reason of this reason? It is because the very same phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is extant still interminis, in terms expressed, in all Greek copies of the Creed; and necessarily employed in the Latin also, as before was shown. Which if it may not be admitted in the Articles of the Catholic Church, and the Communion of Saints, with the rest that follow: I see no cause why it should be admitted in the front of all, which was to be the leading Case unto all the rest. But other men of higher mark have seen this before me, who give no other sense thereof in this place of the Creed, then to believe that there is one only eternal God, the Maker of all things. For thus the Book entitled Pastor, and commonly ascribed to Hermes St. Paul's scholar. Ante omnia unum credere Deum esse, qui condidit omnia 
(k) Hermes.  i. e. Before all other things believe that there is one God who made all things. Origen thus, Primum credendus est Deus qui omnia creavit, 
(l) Origen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in prooemio. , i. e. In the first place we must believe that there is a God, by whom all things were created. S. Hilary of Poitiers thus, In absoluto nobis & facilis est aeternitas, jesum Christum a mortuis suscitatum credere 
(m) Hilar. de Trinitate, l. 10. , i.e. Eternity is prepared for us, and made easy to us, if we believe that Christ is risen from the dead. And finally thus Charles the Great in the Creed published in his name, but made by the most learned men which those times afforded; Praedicandum est omnibus, ut credant Patrem, Filium & Spiritum sanctum unum esse Deum omnipotentem 
(n) Symbol. Caroli, M. , i. e. the Gospel must be preached to all men, that they may know that the Father, Son, and holy Ghost is one God Almighty. Which resolution and authority of the ancient Fathers, is built no doubt upon the dictate and determination of S Paul himself, who did thus lead the way unto them; viz. He that comes to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him 
(o) Heb. 11.6. . Where the first Article of the Creed I believe in God, is thus expounded, and no otherwise, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, I believe that God is, that there is a God. According to which Exposition of the blessed Apostle our Reverend jewel publishing the Apology and Confession of the Church of England did declare it thus 
(p) jewel. Apol. Eccles. Anglic. . We believe that there is one certain Nature and Divine power which we call GOD, etc. and that the same one God hath created Heaven and Earth, and all things contained under Heaven. We believe that jesus Christ the only Son of the Eternal Father, when the fullness of time was come, did take of that blessed and pure Virgin both flesh and all the nature of man, etc. that for our sakes he died and was buried, descended into Hell, etc. We believe that the holy Ghost is very God, etc. and that it is his property to mollify and soften the hardness of men's hearts, when he is once received thereunto, etc. We believe that there is one Church of God, and that the same is not shut up (as in times passed amongst the jews) into some one corner or Kingdom; but that it is Catholic and Universal, and dispersed throughout the whole world, etc. and that this Church is the Kingdom, the Body, and the Spouse of CHRIST, etc. To conclude, we believe that this ourselves same flesh wherein we live, although it die and come to dust, yet at the last shall return again to life by the means of Christ's Spirit, which dwelleth in us, etc. and that we through him shall enjoy everlasting life, and shall for ever be with him in glory. Which consonancy of expression being so agreeable to that observed before by the ancient Fathers; and that observed before by the ancient Fathers, so consonant unto the expression of S. Paul the Apostle, is the last reason which I have for this resolution, that the so much applauded explication of the phrase in Deum credere, is not to be admitted in this place of the Creed. And this shall also serve for a justification of that gloss or Commentary, which I have given on this first Article: viz. that to believe in God the Father Almighty, is only to believe that there is one Immortal and Eternal Spirit, of great both Majesty and Power, which we call GOD; and that this God is the Father Almighty, the Father both of JESUS CHRIST and of all mankind, who as a Father hath not only brought us into the world, but hath provided us of all things necessary both for body and soul, protecting us by his mighty power, and governing us and our affairs by his infinite wisdom.  
But against this there may be some objections made, which must first be answered, before we come unto the further explication of this Article. For if Faith be no other than a firm assent to supernatural truths revealed; the Reprobate, (as they call them) may be said to have faith, which yet is reckoned in the Scripture as a peculiar gift of God unto his Elect, which is therefore called Fides electorum, or the Faith of the Elect, Tit. 1.1. 2. If to believe in God the Father Almighty, and in JESUS CHRIST his only Son, etc. be only to believe that there is a God, and that all those things are most undoubtedly true and certain which be affirmed of JESUS CHRIST in the holy Scripture; the Devil may be reckoned for a true believer, S. james assuring us of this, that the Devils do believe and tremble, jam. 2.19. And 3. if the definition and the explication before delivered, be allowed for currant, it will quite overthrow the received distinction of Faith into Historical, temporary, saving or justifying faith, and the faith of Miracles; so generally embraced in the Protestant Schools. This is the sum of those objections, which I conceive most likely to be made against me; but such as may be answered without very great difficulty. For that the Reprobate (as they call them) may have Faith in CHRIST, is evident by many instances and texts of Scripture. Of Simon Magus it is written in the Book of the Acts, that he believed and was baptised, and continued with Philip 
(q) Act. 8.13.  the Evangelist. Adhaerebat Philippo, saith the Vulgar, he stuck so fast unto him, that he would not leave him. Ask Calvin what he thinks of this faith of Simons, and he will tell you, Majestate Evangelii victum, vitae & salutis authorem Christum agnovisse, ita ut libenter illi nomen daret 
(r) Calvin Instit. l. 3. c. 2. ●. 10. ; that being vanquished by the power and Majesty of the Gospel of Christ, he did acknowledge him to be the Author of salvation and eternal life, and gladly was enrolled amongst his Disciples. And whereas some had taught and published amongst other things, that Simon never did believe, but counterfeited a belief, for his private ends: Calvin doth readily declare his dislike thereof, acknowledging this faith of Simons to be true and real, though but only temporary. Non tamen multis assentior qui simulasse duntaxat fidem putant quum minime cred●ret 
(s) Idem in Act. 8.13. , I cannot yield to them (saith he) which think he only made a show of faith, which he never had: Why so? Quia Lucas aperte testatur eum credidisse, because S. Luke affirms that he did believe, being convinced by the signs and miracles which S. Philip wrought, as many others of Samaria at the same time were. And yet no doubt but Simon Magus was a Reprobate, a man rejected by the Lord in regard of his wickedness 
(t) Act. 8.21, 22. , and that his heart was not right in the sight of God: and afterwards an author of such mischief in the Church of God, that Ignatius, who lived near those times, very rightly calls him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(u) Ignat. Epi. , the first begotten of the Devil. The like m●y be affirmed also of Alexander, Hymeneus, and Philetus 
(x) 1 Tim. 1.19, 20. & 2 Tim. 2.17, 18. , who had been made partakers of the Faith of CHRIST, and were zealous in it for the time; but afterwards made shipwreck of it, denying (amongst other Articles of the Christian faith) that of the resurrection of the dead; and thereby overthrowing the faith of some. Men questionless given over to a reprobate sense, or else we may be well assured St. Paul had never given them over to the hands of Satan, as it is plain he did 
(y) 1 Tim. 1.20. . But what need search be made into these particulars, when Calvin himself affirms in general, Reprobis fidem tribui, eosdem interdum simili fere sensu atque Electos affici, eosque merito dici Deum sibi propitium credere 
(z) Calvin Instit. l. 3. c. 2. n. 11. , etc. that Faith is given unto the Reprobate; that sometimes they are touched with the like sense of God's grace as the Elect ones are, and may deservedly be said to believe that God is favourable and propitious to them? God sometimes makes the Sun of Righteousness as well as the Sun of Heaven, to shine on the evil and on the good. Which notwithstanding, Faith is called, and that most properly, Fides Electorum, the Faith of God's Elect, in that and other places of the Book of God, because the fruits thereof are in them more visible, the confession of the same more fervent, the seeds thereof more fastly rooted, and the fruit more durable. For which cause possibly the Apostle doth there join together the faith of God's Elect, and the knowledge of the truth which is after godliness: Which is indeed the special difference, which is between the faith of the Elect, and the faith of the Reprobates. For if the fruit be unto holiness, no question but the end thereof will be life everlasting 
(a) Rom. 6.22. . It is not then the weakness or the want of faith, which doth alone exclude the Reprobate from the Kingdom of Heaven, and make him finally uncapable of the grace and favour of the Lord, in the day of judgement, but the want of a good conscience in the sight of God. And therefore if we mark it well, St. Peter did not charge it upon Simon Magus, that he wanted faith, or that his faith was only a dissembled hypocritical faith; upbraiding him, as formerly Ananias in another case, that he had not only lied unto men, but unto God 
(b) Act. 5.4. : but that he was in the gall of bitterness, and in the bonds of iniquity, not having his heart right in the sight of God 
(c) Act. 8.23.21. . Nor did St. Paul accuse the said three Apostates, that they never had received the faith, or that the faith which they received was not true and real; but that first having put away a good conscience 
(d) 1 Tim. 1.19. , they afterwards made shipwreck of the faith also, blaspheming God, and scattering abroad their dangerous errors, to the seducing of their brethren. If Simon had repent of his wickedness 
(e) Act. 8.22.  as St. Peter advised, it may be charitably supposed that the thoughts of his heart had been forgiven him. And Hymeneus and Alexander, if they had made good use of the Apostles censure 
(f) 1 Tim. 1.20. , (when he delivered them unto Satan) for the destruction of the flesh 
(g) 1 Cor. 5.4. , no question, but their spirits might have been saved in the day of the Lord JESUS. Which may suffice for answer to the first objection, touching the faith of reprobates, (as they use to call them) whose firm assent to supernatural truths revealed, makes them not inheritable to the Kingdom of Heaven, because they hold the truth revealed in unrighteousness, and so become without excuse 
(h) Rom. 1. 18.20. , as St. Paul tells us (in another case) of the ancient Gentiles.  
The next Objection is, that if this phrase in Deum credere, import no more than this, that there is a God, and that all his words are Divine truths, and all the world the workmanship of his hands alone; the Devils do believe as much, as St. james assures us. Thou believest (saith he) that there is one God; thou dost well: the Devils also believe and tremble, jam. 1.19. The answer unto this is easy. St. james assures us of the Devils that they believe there is one God, but doth withal assure us this that this belief of theirs confirms them in the certainty and foreknowledge of their everlasting damnation; the apprehension of the which produceth nothing in them but fear and horror. The Devils do believe that there is a God, and that this God is just in all his actions, and righteous in all his ways; unchangeable in his Decrees; Yesterday, and to day, and the same for ever. What other comfort can they reap from this faith of theirs, but that being once condemned by God to eternal fire, they are reserved in everlasting chains under darkness, to the judgement of the great and terrible day 
(i) Judas v. 6. ? For knowing that the judgements of the Lord are just, and his doom unchangeable; they must needs know withal the certainty of their own damnation, or else they cannot properly be affirmed to believe this truth, that there is a God. And as they do believe that there is a God, so they believe also that he is the Maker of heaven and earth. For being at the first created by Almighty God with so great perspicacity and clearness of the understanding, they could not choose but know the hand that made them, and consequently believe that he made all those things which are ascribed to God in the holy Scripture. Though by their fall, they lost the favour of the Lord, their first estate in which they were created by Almighty God, the grace by which they stood, and the glories which they did possess: yet lost they not that quickness and agility of motion, that perspicacity and clearness of the understanding, wherewith they were endowed by God at their first Creation. But what makes this unto their comfort, when the same knowledge or belief (call it which you will) by which they are assured that God made the Heavens and the Earth, and all the things therein contained; will keep them always in remembrance of this most sad truth, that he also made an Hell of fire, where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth, prepared for the Devil and his Angels 
(k) Mat. 25.30.1. ? To go a little farther yet, the Devils did not only believe long since, that CHRIST was come in the flesh, but publicly proclaimed him in the open Synagogue, to be the holy Son of God 
(l) Mark 1.24. , JESUS the Son of God 
(m) Mat. 8.29. , in another place. What benefit do they expect from this Confession, what recompense for that Belief so professed and published ●; but an assurance that they have no part in David, nor any inheritance at all in the Son of jesse? How so? Because they knew full well, no mere Creature better, that CHRIST took not on him the nature of Angels, but that he took on him the seed of Abraham 
(n) Heb. 2.16. . And if he took not on him the nature of Angels, as they knew he did not, he could not be a Mediator between them and God: and if no Mediator between them and God, they have no interest in his merits, nor can claim any profit by his death and passion; but must continue in that state wherein God hath plunged them for their sins, without hope of remedy. The Devils than believe, but withal they tremble; and good reason for it: that belief making them assured that their case is desperate, and that there is no mercy for them in God's heavenly Treasury: Besides, admit the Devil did believe all those sacred truths, which are affirmed of CHRIST in the Book of God; what will this avail them? For must they not then believe this truth amongst the rest, that without true repentance there can be no entrance into the Kingdom of Heaven? and if they do believe that truth, must they not conclude, that there can be no place for them in the heavenly glories, because the door of repentance is shut against them, and that the Baptism of Repentance is a way to Heaven, whereof their nature is not capable? Small comfort doubtless in this faith, but of anguish plenty.  
So far I had proceeded in this discourse when I encountered with a Treatise of Doctor jackson's the late Dean of Peterburgh, containing the Original of Unbelief, misbelief, etc. In which I find so strong a confirmation of my opinion herein, that I have thought it not unnecessary to lay down his words for the clear evidence thereof. 
(o) Sect. 1. ch. 2.  Thus then saith he. To believe in God hath gone currant so long for so much as to put trust or confidence in him, that now to make it go for less will perhaps be an usurpation of authority more than critical, and much greater than befits us. Notwithstanding if on God's behalf we may plead what Lawyers do in cases of the Crown, Nullum tempus occurrit Regi, that the Ancient of days may not be prejudiced by antiquity of custom or prescription, especially whose Original is erroneous; the case is clear, That to believe in God in their intention, who first composed this Creed, is no more than to believe there is a God, or to give credence to his Word. For justifying this Assertion, I must appeal from the English Dialect in which the manner of speech is proper and natural, if it were consonant unto the meaning of the Original: as also from the Latin in which the phrase being foreign and uncouth, is to be valued by the Greek, whose stamp and character it heareth. Now the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as also the Hebrew phrase whereunto by sacred Writers it was framed, is no more than hath been said, To believe there is a God; Otherwise we must believe not only in God the Father, in Christ the Son, and in the holy Ghost, but in the Catholic Church, in the Communion of Saints, in the forgiveness of sins, and in the resurrection of the body, and in life everlasting, seeing the Greek particle, (usually expressed by the Latin In) is annexed after the same manner to all these objects of our belief, as is apparent in the Ancient Greek Creeds. And he that diligently readeth the Translation of the Septuagint shall find the Greek phrase which is verbatim, rendered by the Latin, in Deum credere, to believe in God, promise●ously used for the other credere Deo, i. e. to believe God. Or if besides the evident Records of the ancient Copies personal witnesses be required amongst the Ancients, I know few, amongst Modern Writers none more competent, than those that are expressly for us, as Beza, Mercer, Drusius, unto whom we may add Ribera & Lorinus also. Now as to use the benefit of a truth known and testified is always lawful; so to us in this case it is most expedient, almost necessary. For either I did not rightly apprehend whilst I read it, or at least now remember not how the Schoolman removes the stumbling block, which he had placed in the very entry to this Creed. [If to believe in God, be as much as to put trust or confidence in him, by exacting a profession of this Creed at all men's mouths, we shall enforce a great many to profess a lie.] For of such as not only out of ordinary charity, but upon particular probabilities, we may safely acquit from actual Atheism, or contradicting infidelity, a great number do not put their trust or confidence in God; this being the mark at which the belief of Novices must aim, not the first step they are to make in this progress. And not long after he makes answer unto this Objection, touching the belief of Devils, or of wicked Angels: of whom we cannot say (say some) that they do believe in God, though they believe his being more firmly than we can do, and know his Word as clearly. For as he handsomely illustrates; If the King's Majesty should proclaim a general pardon to a number of known Rebels, and vow execution of judgement without mercy upon some principal offenders, which had maliciously and cunningly seduced their simplicity: I suppose his will and pleasure equally manifested unto both, and so believed, would as much dishearten the one, as encourage the other to rely upon his clemency. Such notwithstanding altogether is the case between men and wicked angels. The one believes CHRIST took the Woman's seed, and therefore cannot without such wilful mistrust of the promise of life, as was in his first Parents to God's threats of death, despair of Redemption by the eternal Sacrifice. The other as firmly believe, or rather evidently know, that CHRIST in no wise took the Angelical nature; and without this ground the better they believe his Incarnation, the less are their hopes of their own Redemption.  
As for the third and last Objection touching the overthrow of the distinction of Faith, into Historical, Temporary, saving or justifying faith, and the faith of Miracles, so generally received and countenanced in the Protestant Schools; it works no effect at all in me: who am resolved not to hazard the loss of a truth, to save the credit of a distinction. Nor are the membra dividentia, as Logicians call them, so well choyced and stated, as either to require such care of their preservation, or not to bring them into question. For all faith is Historical, there's no doubt of that; and the other members of the distinction either are coincident, or but degrees only of the same one faith. Vrsinus, the Divinity Reader in Heidelberg, though he both useth & approveth this distinction, yet to my seeming, takes not the terms to be so different as the members of a good Division ought to be by the rules of Logic; and indeed so confounds them one with another, that we can hardly see where the difference lieth. For he confesseth in plain terms, 
(p) Vrsin. Theses Theol. c. 13.  fidem justificantem Historicam semper inse complecti, that justifying faith doth always comprehend the Historical in it, and that the faith of Miracles, hath either Temporary or Historical faith always joined unto it. If so, the difference between them must be very small, consisting more in magis & minus, and such degrees of comparison, then in any spiritual and formal difference: and possibly it may fall out that the faith of miracles, (as they call it) is rather an extraordinary gift or effect of faith, than any distinct species or branch thereof. First, for Historical faith, that faith whereby we do believe, Ea vera esse 
(q) Id. ibid.  quae in libris Prophetarum & Evangelistarum tradita sunt, by which we do believe those things for true which are contained in the Books of the Old and New Testament, as themselves define it: I cannot see wherein it differeth from justifying or saving faith, unless perhaps it be in the application, which rather is an Act of faith then a species of it. And 'tis but a perhaps, if that, for in my mind Dr. jackson reasoneth very well 
(r) jackson of justifying faith. c. 2. , That our Faith is not to be counted unsound or non salvifical, because Historical, but rather ofttimes therefore insufficient to some because not so fully Historical as it might be; or in that our apprehension of divers matters related in Sacred stories is not so great, so lively and sound, as to equalise the utmost limits of some belief, which yet may be fully comprehended under Historical assent: there being no assent which can exceed the measure of that belief or credence which is due unto sacred Writers. Which if it be on our parts as it ought to be, to Gods general promises, it will more forcibly, more truly and naturally apply them to us in particular, than we ourselves can possibly do, by beginning our faith at that particular application where indeed it must end. For temporary faith they define that next, 
(s) Vrsin. Cutech. part. 2. qu. 21. n. 2.  to be an Assent unto the Doctrine of the Gospel accompanied with joy and gladness, and the outward profession of the same, but such as lasteth but for a season, and fades in time of persecution and affliction. And this they ground upon that passage in our Saviour's parable, where it is said, 
(t) Matth. 13.20, 21.  that He which receiveth the seed in stony places, the same is he that receiveth the Word, and anon with joy receiveth it; yet hath he not root in himself, but dureth for a season: For when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the Word, by and by he is offended. But for my part I could never see any reason to persuade me yet, that our Saviour in that Parable did purpose to represent unto our view the several kinds of Believers, but the several kinds of hearers only; many of which do hear the Word with divers ends and different purposes, but only they which do so hear the Word of God, as to bring forth the fruit of good living, shall like the good grain in the following Parable, be laid up at the last day in the barn of the Heavenly husbandman. Or granting that they build this definition on a ground well laid, yet I see nothing to the contrary, but that the temporary faith which is there defined may be a true and lively faith, and justify the man that hath it in the sight of God; though failing in the course of his Christian race, he do not get the prize proposed unto them that win, and hold out to the very end. A temporary faith may justify for the present time, and bring forth many fruits of holiness and newness of life; but it is faith with perseverance in the works of Piety, which shall receive the Crown in the day of Judgement. And if this Temporary faith be not saving also, it is not in regard of itself, that it wants any of those signs and tokens by which a saving faith is to be discerned; but that the man that is endued or invested with it, hath not the gift of perseverance, but out of worldly fear, or on by-respects makes shipwreck of his faith, or casts it overboard in the storm as a thing unprofitable. So that the difference between Temporary and Salvifical faith, is not in any thing essential to the true nature of faith; but only in duration, which is accidental, and extrinsical: which make it no more a distinct species of faith, or to fall short in any thing which true faith should have, then that a man who dyeth in the flower of his youth, wants any thing of being as complete and perfect a man, as he that lives unto the age of Methusalem. That magis & minus do not differre specie, is an old rule in Logic. And so Bucanus doth conclude to the point in hand, though as professed and rigid a Calvinian as any other whatsoever, affirming plainly 
(u) Bucan Com. loc. de Fide. , Fidem languidam esse veram fidem, that a weak and languishing faith is a true faith; on this very reason, Quia magis & minus non variant rerum species, as before is said. Which rule if it hold good in the intention of Faith, as to strength and weakness, will certainly hold good in the extension of it also, as to length and shortness of duration.  
Last of all, for the faith of Miracles or fides Miraculorum, as they please to call it, is defined by the said Vrsinus to be Donum singulare faciendi aliquod opus extraordinarium, aut praedicendi certum eventum ex revelatione divina 
(x) Vrsin. Catech. part. 2. qu. 21.  that is to say, a singular gift of doing some extraordinary and supernatural work, or foretelling things to come by divine Revelation. But this considered as it ought, is so far from being a distinct species of faith, that it ought not to be called faith at all: but is rather the effect of an eminent faith, or some more extraordinary gift superadded to it. For CHRIST our Saviour reckoneth it as the effect of a powerful faith, saying to his Disciples, when they seemed to complain, because they could not cast the Devil out of a man who was brought before them 
(y) Mat. 17.20. , that it was propter incredulitatem ipsorum, by reason of their unbelief, as our English reads it, that it to say, because their faith was yet but weak and newly planted, not strong nor spiritful enough to effect such wonders. And the Apostle reckoning up those gifts and graces of the holy Ghost, which God bestowed upon his Church in her first plantations, gives us this punctual list or catalogue of them, saying, that unto one is given by the Spirit the Word of Wisdom, to another the Word of knowledge by the same Spirit; to another is given Faith by the same Spirit; to another the gift of healing by the same Spirit 
(z) 1 Cor. 12.8, 9, 10. ; to another power to do miracles; to another prophecy; to another the discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues, etc. Where plainly Faith, the gift of healing, Prophesying, and the power of working Miracles, are counted for distinct graces of the holy Ghost; by consequence, the power of working Miracles is no species of faith, but rather something extraordinary superadded to it as before I said. So that we need not stand so much upon this distinction, as in regard thereof to recede from the Exposition before delivered, wherein it was affirmed that in Deum credere, to believe in God, is only to believe that there is one Immortal and Eternal Spirit, of great both Majesty and Power, which we call GOD: and that this God is the Father Almighty, who as he made all things by his mighty power, so he doth still preserve them by his divine Providence, and preserve them by his infinite wisdom. And this Interpretation of the phrase in Deum credere, or in Christum credere, doth hold best correspondence with the definition of faith before laid down. For if Faith be no other than a firm assent to supernatural truths revealed: then to include no more in these forms of speech, then that there is a God, an Almighty God the maker of all things, and that his only Son JESUS CHRIST our Lord both did and suffered all these things which are affirmed of him in the holy Scriptures, and briefly laid together in the present Creed; must needs be most agreeable to the nature of faith▪ Which being premised once for all, we shall proceed unto the proof of the present Article: in which we shall first make it clear and evident out of monuments and records of the learned Gentiles (for in this point it were unnecessary to consult either the Scriptures or the Fathers) that there is an infinite incomprehensible and eternal Spirit, whom we call by the Name of GOD; and secondly that this GOD is only one, without any Rival or Competitor in the public Government of the Universe: And this shall be the argument of the following Chapter.   

CHAP. II. That there is a God, and but one God only, and that this one God is a pure and immortal Spirit, and the sole Governor of the World; proved by the light of Reason, and the testimonies of the Ancient Gentiles.  
THat GOD is, or that there is a God, is a truth so naturally graffed in the soul of man, that neither the ignorance of letters, nor the pride of wealth, nor the continual fruition of sensual pleasures have been able to obliterate the Characters or impressions of it. For Tully very well observeth, Nullam gentem tam feram esse, neminem omnium tam immanem, cujus mentem non imbuerit deorum opinio, That there was never Nation so barbarous, nor man so brutish and inhuman, but was seasoned with this opinion, that there was a God 
(a) Cicer. in Tusc. quaest. l. 1. : And though (saith he) many misguided by ill customs, or want of more civil education do conceive amiss of the Divinity, yet they did all suppose a nature or power Divine: to which they were not drawn by conference and discourse with others, nor by tradition from their Ancestors, or the laws of their Country; but by a natural instinct imprinted in them. quae gentium omnium consensio lex putanda est, which general consent of all people concerning this matter is to be esteemed the Law of Nature. And though the civil wisdom which appeareth in the laws of Lycurgius, Numa, and other ancient Legislators amongst the Heathens, may argue probably an opinion in them of framing many particular rites of Religion, as politic Sophisms to retain that wild people in awe, for whose sake they devised then; yet could not their inventions have wrought so successfully upon men's affections, unless they had been naturally inclined to the ingraffed notion of a GOD in general, under pretence of whose Sovereign right, those particulars had been commended to them, or obtruded on them. A more plentiful experiment of which evident truth, hath been suggested to us in these later Ages, wherein divers Countries peopled with Inhabitants of different manners and education have been discovered; the very best whereof have been far more barbarous, than the worst of those which were so counted in the days of Tully, yea or of Numa or Lycurgus, though long time before him. And yet amongst these savage Indians, who could hardly be discerned from brute beasts, Nisi in hoc uno quod loquerentur 
(b) Lactant. l. 3.8. , as Lactantius once said in a case much like, but only in that they had the use of speech: were found to have acknowledged several Gods or superior powers, to which they offered sacrifices and other rites of Religion, in testimony of their gratitude for benefits received from them. As if the signification of man's obligements to some invisible power for health, food, and other necessaries, or for their preservation from dysasters and common dangers were as natural to him, as fawn or the like dumb signs in dogs, other tame, domestic creatures, are to those who cherish them. Concerning which, as Cicero one of the wisest of the Gentiles gives an excellent rule; so of that natural inclination did the Apostle of the Gentiles make an excellent use. For there were many great and famous Philosophers, which did not only ascribe the government of the World to the wisdom of the Gods; but did acknowledge all necessary supplies of health and welfare to be procured from their providence. Insomuch that corn and other increase of the Earth (saith Cicero) together with that variety of times and seasons; with those alterations or changes of weather, by which the fruits of the Earth do spring up, and ripen, are by them made the effects of Divine goodness, and of the love of GOD to mankind. And on this ground St. Paul proceeded in his Sermon to the people at Lystra, whom he endeavoured to bring unto the knowledge of the only true invisible GOD, by giving them to understand, that though in times past he had suffered all Nations to walk in their own ways 
(c) Act. 14.16, 17. , yet did he not leave himself without witness, in that he (was beneficial or) did good unto them, and gave them rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling their hearts with food and gladness. From which one stream of Divine goodness, experienced in giving rain, (to proceed no further) did the old Grecians christian their great god jupiter by the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; as the Latins on the same reason did surname him Pluvius.  
And to say truth, the prudent Orator had very good ground both for his observation and the reason of it. For of all the Nations known in the times he lived in, there was none branded with the stain of Atheism, but the poor Fenni, a Sect or Tribe amongst the Germans. Of whom it is affirmed by Tacitus, that they had neither household gods, nor corn, nor cattle, nor any thing in property they could call their own; but were indeed a people of so extreme a poverty, that they no more needed the helps of God or man, than the Beasts of the field. Fennis mira feritas, foeda paupertas, non arma, non equi, non penates 
(d) Tacit. de mor. German. , as he tells us there. And more than so, they had attained, saith he, to the hardest point, Vt ne voto quidem opus sit, that they had no need nor use of prayers to the gods on high. For what need they make supplication to the gods and goddesses for blessings on their Corn, and their Wine, or Oil, who neither sowed nor planted, nor used any husbandry? What should they do with household gods who had no houses, but the Earth only for their bed, and the Heavens for the Canopy? And yet perhaps these Fenni were not altogether without the knowledge of GOD, or to be counted absolute Atheists, more than the barbarous people of other new discovered Countries; but that they had this Character bestowed upon them, because they showed less signs of any Religion than those Nations did with whom the Romans had had longer acquaintance, and so were more experienced in their rites and customs. And of all men that flourished before Tully's time, there were none stigmatised with the brand of Atheism, but only Diagoras Melius, and Protagoras the Cyrenaean; to whom some added Enhemerus the Tegaean also. Of the two first indeed it is said by Lactantius, Protagoras deos in dubium vocavit, Diagoras exclusit 
(e) Lactant. l. 1.2. , that Protagoras first called the being of the gods in question, and that Diagoras was the first who denied it absolutely, who therefore was surnamed, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or the Atheist, as Minutius hath it. And yet perhaps it will be found upon further search, that neither of the three did doubt or deny this truth, that there was a God; but that they got this ill repute amongst the Gentiles, for scoffing and deriding those Idol-gods, whom their neighbours worshipped. For of Diagoras it is said, that when he cast the Statue of Hercules into the fire, he did it with this scoff or jeer, In hoc decimo tertio agone mihi inservias, that he should serve him now in that thirteenth labour, as he had done Euristeus in the other twelve 
(f) Ap. Mor●. de vera Relig. . And as well known is that of Protagoras also, who is said to have thus mocked at the Idolatries of the old Egyptians; Si dii sunt, cur plangitis? si mortui, cur adoratis? i. e. If they be gods, why do you lament them? (for in the rites and sacrifices of the goddess Isis, they used to make great lamentations) if dead, why do you then adore them? As for the third man Euhemerus (for these were all of note who stand thus accused) he was accounted guilty of Atheism for no other reason, but because he had composed an history of the birth, lives and actions of the Heathen gods, proving that they had been no other than some famous men, whose statuas had been turned to Idols, and themselves worshipped by the people in tract of time for some powers Divine. Which book of his Lactantius 
(g) Lactant l. 1. c. 11.13 etc. , and some others of the Primitive Writers do make very good use of, in their discourses with and against the Gentiles. 'Tis true, that on those grounds, and on those occasions which are spoken of by Enhemerus, the greatest part of the old Heroes, as Saturn, jupiter, Apollo, Neptune, Mars, Hercules, and the rest of that infinite rabble became by degrees to have divine honours conferred upon them. And 'tis as true, that the Egyptians worshipped Apis in the form of an Ox, or the Ox rather under the name of Apis, as being of greatest use to them in the course of their tillage; and so they did also Leeks and Onions, and divers other of the fruits of the Earth also, by which they lived; and some strange creatures also which they dreaded most. quis nescit qualia demens Aegyptus portenta colat 
(h) Lucan. Pharsal. l. 10. , as the Poet hath it. As true it is, that other Nations worshipped the Sun and Moon, and all the rest on the heavenly bodies, unto whose glorious light and influences they thought themselves so much beholding. Which may be used as a further and most invincible argument to prove that the knowledge of this truth, that there was a God, was naturally ingraffed in the souls of all men; and that this natural inclination was so powerful in them, that they rather would have any gods than none at all, and therefore made themselves such gods as came next to hand, worshipping STOCKS and Stones, and Leeks and Onions, and whatsoever else their blind fancies dictated. And this, I take it, gave the hint to Democritus first, and after him to Epicurus, and the whole Sect of the Stoics, 
(i) Lactant. l. 2.  to set up FATE and Fortune in the place of the Gods; or otherwise to invest dame Nature with the powers of a Deity. For finding that the bias of all sorts of people inclined them strongly to believe that there was a God, they were content to let the gods hold their place in Heaven, but then they rob them of their power or supreme providence in governing the World, and ordering the affairs thereof. And this was the disease of David's fool in the Book of Psalms, who used to say in his heart that there was no God. Not that he was so very a fool as to think there was no God at all: but that he thought the God of Heaven was so far above him, and so employed in matters of an higher nature, as neither to take care or notice of the things beneath: Which therefore he●, as Democritus, and the Epicureans after did, ascribed to Chance and Fortune, or to Fate and Nature. And as it seems this error in the time of the Poet juvenal, found such a general entertainment amongst the Romans, that he thought fit to tax it in his Satyrs 
(k) juvenal. Sat. 13.  thus; 
Sunt qui Fortunae jam casibus omnia ponunt,  
Et Mundum nullo credunt Rectore moveri,  
Natura volvente vices & lucis & anni,  
Atque ideo intrepide quaecunque Altaria jurant.   
That is to say; 
Some think the World by slippery chance doth slide,  
That days and years run round without more guide,  
Then Nature's Rule: From whence without all fear  
Of Gods or men, they by all Altars swear.   
But howsoever this opinion, carrying a less show of impiety then that of Diagoras and Protagoras had done before, became more generally to be received among the Gentiles; yet in effect in rather changed then bettered the state of the question. And though it did not strike down all the gods at a blow, yet by degrees it lessened their authority amongst the people, and brought them to depend wholly upon chance and fortune, or on fate and destiny; that in the end there might be no other God thought of, none of the Heavenly Powers be sued to, or adored at all. Which plainly was their aim, as St. Austin telleth us, where notwithstanding their pretences he affirms this of them 
(l) August. de civet. Dei. l. , that all they did conduce to no other end, quam ut nullus omnino aut rogetur, aut colatur Deus. And in this state the business stood when the first Advocates which pleaded in the behalf of the Christian faith, did undertake the vindicating of God's power and providence: and laboured to possess the world with a right opinion both of the Being and divine Nature of GOD; and also of his sovereign power in ordering the course of nature, and governing all sublunary affairs of what kind soever. Whose arguments being drawn especially from the light of reason, and therefore fittest to convince the gainsaying Gentiles, are elegantly summed up by Minutius Felix; out of whose excellent Dialogue I shall here present them according as they lay before me, and then confirm the truth of that which he there delivereth, out of the works and writings of the old Philosophers, and other learned men amongst those Gentiles, whom prejudice and prepossession had not formerly blinded 
(n) Minut. Fel in Octavio.  The difference, saith he, betwixt us men and beasts doth consist in this, that they whose faces are inclined to look down to the earth, seem to be chiefly made to look after their provender. But we whose countenances are raised up towards the Firmament, to whom is given both speech and reason, by which we may know, feel, and imitate the works of God, must needs be counted inexcusable, should we be ignorant of that divine light which doth even thrust itself on our eyes and senses. It is an high degree of Sacrilege to seek for that upon the Earth, which is not to be found but in Heaven on high. Which makes them seem to me to l●●ve neither understanding, sense, nor so much as eyes, who would not have this World accomplished by the Divine wisdom of God, but compacted only of several parcels joined together by chance. For what can be so obvious, so confessed, so manifest, whether we lift up our Eyes to Heaven, or behold those things which are beneath and round about us, then that there is some Divine power of most exquisite judgement, by which the whole frame of Nature is inspired, moved, maintained, and ordered? Behold the Heaven itself, of what a vast circumference, and how swiftly moved, bespangled in the night with stars, illustrated in the day time with the beams of the Sun; and thou mayst know by that, the wonderful and divine disposure of its Supreme Governor. Observe the year, how it ends the circular motion of the Sun; the month distinguished by the increase and wane of the Moon; the mutual succession of light and darkness, that rest and labour may by turns succeed one another. Let us relinquish to Astronomers a more exact discourse of the Stars and Planets; whether they serve to direct the course of Navigation, or usher in the seasons of seed and harvest: which as they were not made, created, nor disposed of, without a Supreme Workman of most perfect wisdom, so could they not be comprehended and made intelligible, but by great art and understanding. When the orderly method of the season distinguisheth itself by the constant variety of several fruits, doth it not openly avouch who is the Author and the Parent thereof? that is to say, the Spring bedecked with flowers, and the Summer with corn, the Fall made acceptable by its fruits; and the Winter necessary by its Olives. Besides how great an argument is it of an heavenly Providence, to interpose the temperament of the Spring and Autumn, lest if it were all Winter it should freeze us with cold; or if it were all Summer, it should scorch us with heat, that so one part of the year might fall into the other, without producing any sensible or dangerous alteration in the state of things? Behold the Sea, how it is bounded with the shore, which it may not pass: the Earth, how it is fructified with trees which itself produceth: the Ocean, how it is divided between ebbs and floods; the Fountains, how they flow with continual streams; the Rivers, how they pass away with perpetual waters. What need I speak of the perpendicular height of Mountains; or the declivities of the hills, or the extension of the fields? What need we speak of that variety of weapons, wherewith brute beasts are armed for their own defence; some fortified with horns, others palisadoed with teeth; some furnished with hoofs, some provided of stings; and others having means to preserve themselves either by the nimbleness of their feet, or the help of their wings? Especially consider the comeliness and beauty of our own bodies, made of an upright structure, an erected countenance, the eyes advanced as Sentinels in the Keep or Watchtower, and all the rest of the senses placed in the Fort or Capital: and will not that acknowledge GOD for its sole Artificer? An endless work it were to run over all particular members; take this once for all, that there is not one part in all the body, which serveth not both for necessary use and ornament also. And which is yet more wonderful than all the rest, though there be the same structure of all, yet hath every man his several and proper lineaments, by which though we are all alike, yet are we also so unlike as to be easily discerned from one another. The manner of our birth, and the desire of procreation, is it not given by GOD alone? That the dugs spring with milk when the Babe doth ripen, and that the Infant groweth up by that milky dew, proceeds it not from the same Author? Nor doth GOD take care only of the whole; but of every part. The Isle of Britain, which is defective in the heat of the Sun, is notwithstanding refreshed with the warmth of the Sea which doth encompass it. Nilus doth satisfy for the want of rain that is in Egypt, Euphrates fatneth Mesopotamia, and Indus is reported both to sow and water the Eastern Regions. If then as often as thou interest into any house, and seest in what an excellent order all things therein are both disposed of and set ●ut at the best advantage, thou canst not choose but think there is some Lord or Master of it which hath so disposed it, and one that is much better than the things themselves: so in this great house the World, when thou observest the Heaven and Earth, the order, law, and providence by which they are guided, how canst thou choose but think that there is some Lord of this Universe, the Author of those Stars and Constellations, of far more beauty than the loveliest of those several parts? But possibly thou mayst not so much call in question, whether there be a Divine Providence which ruleth all things, as whether it be subject to the power of one or of many Gods: which will be no great difficulty to determine neither, if we observe the Arts of Empire used in Earthly Kingdoms, which have their pattern from above. For when did ever any partnership in Empire, either begin upon good terms, or not end in blood! For to say nothing how the Persians being weary of the government of many Rulers, designed the Empire unto him whose Horse should first neigh on the morrow morning; nor to revive the dead fable of the Theban brothers: who hath not heard the story of the Roman twins, contending for the command of a few Shepherds, and a Realm of Cottages? The more than Civil Wars betwixt Caesar & Pompey for the Empire of Rome, which though of very vast extent could not hold them both? Look also how it is in the Oeconomie of Nature, one King amongst the Bees, one Supreme Captain over the flock, and in the herds of cattle one more principal Ruler. And canst thou think the Government of that Heavenly Monarchy can be dismembered or divided? It being so manifest and apparent that God, who is the Father of all things, hath neither beginning nor ending; that to all creatures giveth a being, to himself Eternity; who was a world unto himself when no World was made, and by his Word commandeth, by his wisdom disposeth, by his virtue protecteth, what thing soever is to be found in the whole World. This GOD we cannot see, he is too bright for our eyes; nor touch, he is too pure for our unclean hands; nor apprehend, he is above the reach of our understanding; being infinite, incomprehensible and known how great he is to himself alone. Shall I speak freely what I think? He that conceiveth that he can comprehend the Majesty of God, doth under value him, and he who would not undervalue him, must profess he cannot comprehend him. Nor need we be inquisitive to know his name, his name is GOD: there being no use of proper names, but where a multitude is to be distinguished by their particular appellations. GOD therefore being but one, hath no name but GOD. And to this truth I have the general consent of all men. For when the common people lift their hands to Heaven, they then make mention but of one God only; using to say, (as their occasions do require) that God is great, and that God is true, and if God permit. Which whether it be the natural expression of the common people, or the Confession of a Christian saying his Belief, it is hard to guess.  
This is the sum of that which was alleged by the Christian Advocates, in defence of the Divine nature and power of God; and that this God was one only Sovereign and commanding power, who governed and disposed of all things both in Heaven and Earth. In which there is not any thing affirmed of God, which hath not been before delivered by the ancient Gentiles; whose judgements and opinions in this particular I shall next present. And first beginning with Mercurius surnamed Trismegistus, Lactantius tells us of him that he wrote many books, In quibus Majestatem summi & singularis Dei asserit, in which he doth assert the Majesty of that one and only Supreme God: particularly that he is but one, and being but one, hath no other name than that of GOD 
(o) Lactant. l. 1.6. . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. God, saith he, is but one, and being but one, he wants no name, but is simply nameless, or Anonymus: the very same with that of Minutius Felix, nec nomen Dei quaeras, nomen est Deus 
(p) Minut. Fel. in Octavio. : which is thus seconded by Lactantius, who had seen his Dialogue, Deo quia semper unus est proprium nomen est DEUS. And there is very good reason for it too, I mean why God should have no known name to call him by, as had the Idols of the Heathens; because there is no use of a proper name, Nisi ubi discrimen exegerit multitudo, but where distinction must be made between one and another: which cannot be where there is but one, and never shall be more than one of that rank and order. But Mercurius goes further yet, and doth not only testify that God is one, but that he is the Radix or root of all things, without which nothing was made; that he is infinitely good, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, even goodness itself, and that the name of Good belongeth unto none but him 
(r) Mereur. Trism. in Paeman. c. 2, 3, 4, etc. El in Asclep. c. 6, 7. : and though he gives the name of GOD to the Heathen deities, yet he confesseth in plain terms, that they are so entitled honoris causa, and not naturae ratione. Descend we next unto the Sibyls, and we shall find one of them saying thus of God, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that there is but one God, and that he only is Almighty, and unbegotten 
(s) Lactant. l. 1.6. : another of them saying thus in the Person of GOD, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. e. I am the one and only God, and besides me there is none other. Pass we on next unto the gods, as the Gentiles called them, and we shall hear Apollo being asked the question, what was to be conceived of God, to have returned an answer in one and twenty verses, whereof these are three, as they stand cited by Lactantius 
(t) Id. cap. 7. : 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc.   
In English thus; 
Begotten of himself, without a Mother,  
Not taught of any, nameless, 'cause no other;  
Unmoved with worldly things, and one that dwelleth  
In brightest Heaven, is God that all excelleth.  In the translation of which verses, I have took liberty to render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in brightest Heaven, because I think that either Apollo did allude to the Coelum Empyraeum, used among Philosophers, or that the old Philosophers took that term from him. But whether it were so or no, certain I am that Lactantius doth conclude from hence upon very good grounds, that this answer of Apollo can by no means imaginable be applied to jupiter, Qui & matrem habuerit & nomen, who had both a Mother and a name, as he there observeth; and therefore must be meant of the living GOD. Whom when the Heathens call by the name of jupiter, Falluntur in nomine, sed de una potestate consentiunt, saith Minutius Felix 
(u) Minut. Fel. in Octavio. , though they are mistaken in the name of that Supreme God, yet they agree with us in this, that he is but one. Proceed we forwards to the Poets, and Orpheus the most ancient of them, and one who was Co-temporary with the GOD'S themselves, as we read in Lactantius, l. 1. cap. 6. not only doth affirm of him that he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or the first begotten, before whom none was, which could not be affirmed of jupiter the Son of Saturn, but that he existed of himself only, and gave being to all things besides. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as it is cited amongst many of his verses to this purpose by Clemens of Alexandria 
(x) Clem. Alexand. in Pro●rept.  an old Christian writer. What other Poets say of God we shall see hereafter, when we shall look upon him as the Maker of Heaven and Earth. In the mean time conclude we this first rank of testimonies with that of Pythagoras, who was both a Poet and Philosopher, who telleth us of God, as I find him cited in the works of Clemens, and other Writers of good credit, Deus unus est, Principium omnium rerum, Animatio & motus universi, that there is but one God, the beginning of all things, who animateth and giveth motion to the whole World or Universe.  
In the next rank come the Philosophers or Sages of the Ancient Gentiles, who speak no less divinely of this one God, than the Poets, or Sibylline Oracles have done before. And in the first place we meet with Socrates, who by Apollo himself was pronounced to be the wisest man of all the Grecians; but yet so little a friend of his, or any of the rest of the Heathen gods, that he used openly to deride them upon all occasions, and at the last was poisoned by Decree of the Senate of Athens 
(y) Laert. in vita Socrat. , because he disallowed the multitude of gods whom the people worshipped, endeavouring to bring them to the knowledge of the only God. Tertullian hereupon doth put this witty scorn on their great Apollo, for giving the testimony of the wisest man of all Greece, to him who only of that Nation did deny him and others of his rank and quality to be Gods indeed. O Apollinem inconsideratum (saith he)! sapientiae testimonium reddidit ei viro, qui Deos esse negabat 
(z) Tertul. in Apolog. c. 46. . And though it grew into a byword in the following times, when any man thought otherwise of their many gods, than the vulgar did, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that Socrates his cup was ready for him 
(a) Laert. in vita Socr. ; yet Plato who was his scholar did not only follow him in the same opinion, but publicly maintained it in his Books and Writings. Nay he was so resolved to make good this point, that he gave it out for a rule to his special friends, how they should know whether the business which he writ to them about, were seriously proposed or not. Cum serio, ordior Epistolam ab uno Deo; cum secus, a pluribus 
(b) Plato in Epist. 13. ad Dionys. ; when I intent the matter seriously, I then begin my letters in the name of the one God only; when otherwise, in the names of many. And as his rule was, such was his Divinity or Theology also: calling the true God by the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which may be rightly Englished Being or existing; and is the name by which the LORD doth call himself in the holy Scriptures 
(c) Exod. 3.14. ; but for the Idol-gods he affirms of them, that they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, things which in very deed had no being at all; which is the very same with that of St. Paul, saying, Idolum nihil est 
(d) 1 Cor. 8.4. , that an Idol is nothing. In many places of his Writings, he speaks of God, as solely existing in himself, the beginning and the end of all things, by whom, and for whom they were first created: though otherwhiles, especially in his Books de Legibus, which were for every vulgar eye, he seems to be inclinable to the vulgar error. The Platonists in general speak as divinely of this one God, as their Master did, jamblicus affirming that there was one cause of all things, and one God the Lord of all things 
(e) jamblith de myster. c. 12. etc. , whom he calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, both self-sufficient, and self-being; PROCLUS, that this one God was the Supreme King, who subsisting in and of himself, gave life, and beauty, and perfection to all things besides 
(f) Proclus de Theolog. Platon. ; Simplicuis, that he was that one and only good from whence all goodness did proceed, that unity from which all things took their Original, the God of gods, and the cause of causes 
(g) Simplicius in Ariani Epictet. ; Plotinus, that there is one beginning of all things, of selfsufficiency, communicating life and being to all creatures else, and that those others are no otherwise happy, then by contemplating that intelligible light which shineth so gloriously in the Godhead, as the Moon borroweth all her light from the beams of the Sun 
(h) Plotin. Enn. 1. l. 8. & Enn. 9 . Porphyrius, the scholar of this Plotinus, defining GOD to be both every where, and no where, filling all places whatsoever, but contained in none, and that from him alone do all things proceed, which were, and are, and are to come 
(i) Porphyr. de Abstinent. l. 2. . Finally, not to wander through more particular, this seemeth to have been the general Tenet of all Plato's followers: Quod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ejusdem erant insaniae, that Atheism and the worshipping of many gods, were of equal madness.  
Proceed we next unto the Peripatetics, and their Master Aristotle, who being loath to seem beholding to his Master Plato, did purposely run cross to him in many things, which otherwise his own excellent judgement would have gladly followed. And yet though elsewhere a defender of their many gods, yet in his Books of Metaphysics, and in that de Mundo, he doth not only reduce all motion unto one first mover, but doth expressly say of God, that the World and the whole course of Nature is preserved by him 
(k) Aristot. de Mundo. , that he gives motion to the Sun and Moon, poiseth the Earth on her Basis, and sustaineth all things. And finally it is said of him, that at the time of his death he broke out into this divine expression, Ens entium miserere mei, that is to say, O thou eternal Being from whom all things exist, have mercy upon me. So many principles there are in his works and writings, which may conduct a man to the knowledge of GOD, and so divinely doth he speak of the Heavenly powers, that the Divines of Colen have writ a Book (but on what grounds and warrants, it concerns them to look) entitled De Salute Aristotelis, of the Salvation of Aristotle. Theophrastus' that great Doctor in Physic, but by Sect a Peripatetic, maintaineth that there is one only Divine principle, or beginning from whence all things exist 
(n) Theophr. in Metaph & de Saporibus. , one only God who out of nothing hath created all things. And Alexander Aphrodiseus of the same Sect also, composed a whole Tract of the divine Providence of God, in which he showeth that there is one God who ruleth all things, and is of power to do whatsoever he pleaseth 
(o) Alex. Aphrodis. de Provident. . Let us next look upon the Academics, whose common guise it was to leave all things doubtful, Qui omnia facerent incerta, as Lactantius hath it 
(p) Lactant. l. 1. c. 6. , and we shall find it said by Tully, who was one of that Sect, Nihil est praestantius Deo, etc. 
(q) Cicero de nat. doerum, l. 2.  that there was nothing more excellent than God; and therefore that by him the whole world was governed, who neither did subject himself unto FATE or Nature. And Plutarch, though much given to Fables, doth advise expressly, that we worship not the Heavens, nor the heavenly bodies, which are but as the Myrours or Looking-glasses in which we may behold his most wonderful Art who made and beautified the world 
(r) Plutarch. de Isid. & Osiride. : Quid enim aliud est Mundus quam Templum ejus? for what else is the World than the Temple of God? Last of all for the ancient Stoics, Zeno is said by Aristotle to have taught of God, that there was only one, or none; and that this one God was Optimus & Maximus, both the best and greatest. And it is registered for the reverend say of old Cleanthes, O Deus rege me per eam causam, per quam omnia temperas & moderaris, Rule me O God by that prime cause whereby thou dost dispose of all things. Which 'Cause they called by the name of Fate or destiny. Epictetus, as of later time, so he speaks more plainly, whose dictates are much made of by the old Platonics, Proclus, Simplicius, and the rest. Discendum ante omnia unum esse Deum, etc. 
(s) Epictet. in Arrian.  It is to be learned (saith he) in the first place, that there is but one God, who doth govern all things; and whatsoever we do, or say, or think, is not hid from him. In Seneca, whom Lactantius calleth Stoicorum acerrimum 
(t) Lactant. l. 1. c. 5. , the most resolute Stoic of the Romans, there are so many several passages to prove this point, that he who would produce them all must transcribe him wholly. For an essay therefore take that which Lactantius citeth, where he calleth God, Deorum omnium Deum, or the God of gods, the Governor of Heaven and Earth, by whom those other Deities whom the people worshipped, were many times suspended and restrained from action.  
Hitherto have we traced the footsteps of the ancient Poets, and all the several sects of the old Philosophers, and found a general consent amongst them that there is a GOD, and that there is but one God, who takes care of all things: Whom, if they call sometimes by the name of Fate or Providence, or Nature, as sometimes they do, we must still understand them of that one God in whom we Christians do profess that we do believe. Or, if they sometimes call him by the name of jupiter, we are to understand the same one God, in whom the rest are comprehended as subservient Instruments. So witnessed the most learned Varro, affirming, as I find him cited by St. Augustine 
(u) August. de Cinit. l. 4. c. 9 , that though the Doctors of the Gentiles did use sometimes to speak of the Gods and Goddesses▪ yet were they all contained in Jupiter, whose powers and Ministers they were. And thereupon the Father buildeth this resolution, that our Ancestors were not either so blind or simple, as to think that Bacchus, Ceres, and the rest were Gods indeed 
(x) Id. ibid. l. 4.24. : but rather the gifts and ministrations (Munera & functiones, as his words are there) of that one only God whom they did believe in. And this persuasion was so naturally implanted in the minds of all men, that in their dangers, and necessities, and more sober thoughts they still made mention of one God, and but one alone. What was observed to this purpose by Minutius Felix is declared before. The same we find to be observed by Tertullian also. Anima licet diis falsis ancillata, etc. The soul, saith he, though servilely obsequious unto these false Gods, yet upon better thoughts, as if awakened newly from sleep and wine, it speaks of one God only in the singular number: it being the common voice of all, to say, If God grant me this; or looking on him as their judge to pronounce these words, God seeth, and I refer it unto God, and God shall acquit me. And saying this, saith he, they lift their eyes up towards heaven, not toward the Capitol 
(y) Tertul. Apol. . Novit enim sedem Dei vivi, as knowing Heaven to be the seat of the living God. The like Lactantius telleth us too, Cum jurant, cum optant, etc. When they swear, or wish, or render thanks, or that the noise of war do affright their ears, they neither do then speak of JOVE, or their many Gods, but of God alone 
(z) Lactant. l. 2.1. ; though after they have scaped the danger, ad Deorum Templa concurrunt, they run unto the Temples of their Idol-gods to offer sacrifice. May we not say of these and the like expressions as Tertullian doth, that they are testimonia Animae naturaliter Christianae, the testimonies of a Soul that is naturally inclined to the Christian faith; or the Confession of a Christian saying his Belief, as Minutius phrased it? If now after these testimonies of the learned Gentiles, and the general acknowledgement of all sorts of people; we should proceed to prove by reason, or in way of argument, that there is one God, and but one alone: it might be thought an endless and impertinent work, considering that there is no herb so ordinary, nor fly so small, nor worm or creature so contemptible, but is an argument sufficient to evince a Godhead. Minutius hath so fully satisfied in that particular, that they which are more copious in pursuit thereof, are but as Commentators, and he the Text; discoursing on his plain song with a fuller descant. And therefore I shall supersede from that way of discourse, resting content with that discovery and progress we have made herein, out of the ancient Poets, and the old Philosophers, and the concurrent testimony of all sorts of people; who lived in those dark times of ignorance, when as the multitude of Gods was in most esteem, and the true worship of this one God, confined, and as it were imprisoned in the House of Israel.  
This therefore being proved or supposed as granted, that there is one GOD, and but one alone; the next particular enquiry which we are to make, must be to find out what GOD is, how we are to define him. A point esteemed so difficult in the former times, that Simonides being asked by Hiero of Syracuse, Quid Deus esset 
(a) Cicero de Natur. Deor. , what God was; desired first one day to consider of it, afterwards two, then four, and still more and more. Of which being asked the reason, he returned this answer, that the more he did consider of it, the more he was unable to determine in it. Both Xenophon and Plato did conceive so also, as Plotinus witnesseth, who hath recorded this for a speech of theirs, Deum pervestigare nec possibile etc. that it was neither possible nor lawful to inquire too far into the nature of GOD. And yet they ventured many of them, upon such particulars, as though they do not make amongst them an exact definition; yet they describe him by those Attributes, as show they were not ignorant of his heavenly nature. Their judgements in this point collected by Minutius Felix, take together here 
(b) Minut. Fel. ; Sat Thales Milesius omnium primus, etc. Let us begin, saith he, with Thales, who though he make water the first cause of all things yet makes he God to be that universal Soul who out of that created all things; the mystery of water and the Spirit being more sublime, then to be understood by the sons of men. Anaximenes, and after him Apolloniates Diogenes make him to be the Air, because both infinite and immensurable. Anaxagoras his opinion was, that GOD was an infinite understanding; Pythagoras, that he was that Soul, which dwelling in the whole frame of Nature, did give life to all things. Xenophanes did use to say, that every infinite with understanding, might be called GOD. Antisthenes, that there were many popular Gods, and but one natural one, or one God of Nature; Speusippus, that God was that natural and animal power, by which all things are governed▪ Democritus, though the first inventor of that absurd opinion, that the World was made of several Atoms, joined by chance together; yet for the most part he puts Nature in the place of GOD, as also did Straton and the Epicureans: And Aristotle though inconstant and of many minds, yet other whiles he makes him be that Soul or understanding which presides over the World. Heraclides Ponticus will have him also to be a Divine soul or understanding; and thereunto inclined Theophrastus, Cleanthes, Zeno, and Chrysippus; save that they sometimes call him by the name of Fate. Xenophon the Disciple of Socrates, was of opinion that the form of the true GOD could not be seen by any man, and therefore was not to be sought or inquired into: Aristo Chius, that he was not to be comprehended: both of them guessing at the Majesty of Almighty God, by a despair of understanding what indeed he was. And Plato finally not only doth affirm of God, that he is the Parent of the World, the Maker of all Celestial and Terrestrial creatures; but by reason of his eminent and incredible power, it was a difficult thing to find what he was, and having found it an impossible matter to express it rightly. And of all these Minutius noteth, that they are Eadem fere quae nostra, the same almost with that which was affirmed of GOD in the schools of CHRIST: Insomuch, saith he, that one might very justly think, that the modern Christians were Philosophers, or that the old Philosophers had indeed been Christians. Lactantius also doth affirm that they did veil the same truth under divers notions; and that whether they called him Nature, Reason, Understanding, Fatal necessity, the Divine Law, or in what phrase soever they did use to speak him; idem est quod anobis Deus dicitur 
(c) Lact. l. 1.5. , it was the same with that which we (the followers of CHRIST) call GOD.  
His nature being thus declared (as far as could be seen by the Eye of Reason) proceed we next unto those Epithets or Adjuncts, whereby that nature is set forth in the best of their Writers. Philolaus a scholar of Pythagoras hath told us of him, that he is singularis, immobilis, sui similis, that there is but one God, the chief Lord of all, and that he is immovable, always like himself 
(d) V. Morn. de verit. Rel. Chr. c. 3. : the Divine Plato, that God is good, and the Idea of all goodness, the Author of whatsoever is good or beautiful, and the fountain of truth, that he is also living and everlasting. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as I have somewhere found him cited. Aristotle sometimes also doth come home to this, in whom the attributes of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, immortal and eternal do eftsoons occur. By Orpheus it is said that he is invisible, that he hath his dwelling in the heavens, that he sits there in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in a Golden Throne, and from thence doth dart his thunders upon wicked men. Phocylides hath given us as much of him, as one verse can hold 
(e) Phocyl. Car.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. There is one God, saith he, most wise, most powerful, and most happy. One of the Sibyls, heaps upon him the most glorious attributes, of being of great Majesty, begotten by none, invisible, yet beholding all things: and Apollo one of the Heathen Gods comes not short of her, saying of God that he was begotten of himself, and taught of none, immovable, and of a name not to be expressed. These two last passages we before cited out of Lactantius, but than it was to prove that there was a GOD. And to these add that verse of the same Apollo, which is elsewhere cited by Lactantius 
(f) Lactant. l. 1. cap. 6, 7. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in which he calleth him the immortal and eternal GOD, the unspeakable Father. Lay all which hath been said together, and we may gather out of all this description of him (for to define him rightly is a thing impossible) that GOD is an immortal and eternal Spirit, existing of himself, without any beginning, invisible, incomprehensible, omnipotent, without change or passion, by whose Almighty power all things were created; and by whose divine goodness they are still preserved. What more than this is said by the Church of England, the purest and most Orthodox of the daughters of Zion; which in her book of Articles thus declares herself 
(g) Art. 1. Of faith in the holy Trinity. , that is to say, There is but one living and true God, everlasting, without body, parts, or passions, of infinite power, wisdom and goodness; the Maker and preserver of all things, both visible and invisible. What more hath been delivered by the Ancient Fathers, who had the light of Scripture to direct them in it; then that which hath been said by these learned Gentiles, upon no other ground then the light of Reason? Which manifestly proveth that both the Being and the Nature of God, were points so naturally graffed in the souls of men, that neither the ignorance of letters, nor the pride of wealth, nor the continual fruition of sensual pleasures have hitherto been able to efface the Characters and impressions of it, as before I said. And if a GOD and but one only, he must be such as is described, or no GOD at all. But of the Attributes and Acts of Almighty God, we shall speak more at large in the two next chapters.  
In the mean time, by this Theology of the learned and more sober Gentiles we may see sufficiently, that many of those who are counted Christians do fall most infinitely short of them in the things of GOD. Of this kind were the Anthropomorphitae, a sort of Heretics proceeding from one Andaeus, by birth a Syrian, but living for the most part in Egypt, who miserably mistaking many Texts of holy Scripture, conceived and taught Deum humana esse forma, eundemq corporalia membra habere, that God was made of humane shape, and had the same members as men have 
(h) Niceph. Eccles. hist. l. 11. c. 14. . Which though it was so gross a folly as would have been hissed out of all the schools of Philosophy; yet found it such a plausible welcome with the Monks of Egypt, that Theophilus the learned Patriarch of Alexandria was in danger to be torn in pieces, because he had opposed them in their peevish courses 
(i) Nicephor. hist. Eccles. l. 13. c. 12. . And of this sort also were the Manichees, who for fear they should make God the Author of any thing which was not pleasing to them, as darkness, winter, and whatsoever else did seem evil to them; would needs obtrude upon the world two contrary principles, or two Supreme Powers, from one of which all that was good, from the other all that was evil or so seemed to them, did proceed originally 
(k) Id. Eccles. hist. l. 6. c. 31. . The first Author of this Heresy amongst the Christians, was one Manes, who lived about the times of Aurelianus, Anno 213. by birth a Persian, to whom this error was first propagated out of the Schools of Zoroaster, that great Eastern Rabbin, who seeing but with half an eye into sacred matter, had fancied to himself two Gods, both of equal power, one good, the other bad; the one called Oromases, and the other Arimanius; the one the Author of good things, and the other of evil. Other impieties he maintained, which made him execrable in the eyes both of God and man; but I take notice of no other at this present time, as being not within the compass of the work in hand. And even in this we need not spend more time to confute his fellows, then to send him and his to school to the old Philosophers; most of the which acknowledged but one principium, or common principle, from whom all creatures in the world took their first beginning: Or if they did allow of many principia, as many times they did unto several things, which seemed to be of contrary nature unto one another; yet they referred all in the last resort to one only principle or principium, in which all others met as their common centre 
(l) Simplic. in Ariani Epictet. . And this they called Principium omnia principia supereminens, the Principle or principium which excelled all others, and finally resolved, ab hoc uno principio omnia principia, that from this one principle or principium all the rest descended. Had it been otherwise, what a continual conflict had there been since the world began betwixt God and the Devil, betwixt the good principle and the bad; betwixt the giver of blessings, and inflicter of punishments. For being of contrary affections, Fieri posse ut aliquid diversum velit, it might well be (or rather it could not otherwise be) that they should differently declare themselves in some one particular 
(m) Lactant. l. 1. c. 3. , which must needs draw them into such remediless quarrels, as Homer fableth to have been amongst the Gods of Gentiles, whiles some declared themselves for Troy, and the rest against it. Mulciber in Trojam, pro Troja stabat Apollo, said the Latin Poet. Which what a confusion and distraction it would bring on the course of Nature, I leave to any man to judge which hath common sense. But Manes, as it seems, being a near neighbour to the Curdi, who dwelled close by Persia, had entertained also their Religion▪ of whom it might be said, and that not unfitly, as Lactantius doth of some of the Greek Numen, se alios deos colere ut prosint, alios ne noceant 
(n) Lactant. l. 1.20. , that they did worship some Gods for fear, and others for love; some out of hope to receive benefits and blessings from them, others lest else they should be troubled and afflicted by them. But Manes was his name, and madness was his nature, (so the name doth signify). And little less than mad are they, who for fear they should be thought to savour of the Manicheans, have run themselves upon the contrary extreme; in making God not the prime Author only of the evil of punishment, but also of the evil of sin.  
Nor can it but seem strange to a knowing man, who looks with an indifferent eye upon the ancient Gentiles, and some present Christians; that either those in times of such an Epidemical and general darkness, should have so much of the Christian in them, or that they which live under the light of Christ's glorious Gospel, should have so much in them of the Heathen. The learned Gentiles though they did acknowledge but one Supreme power, whom they called Deum naturalem, or the God of Nature: yet they allowed of many National and Topical Gods, as before I told you out of Varro. And find we not that though the Pontificians publicly profess but one Sovereign God, yet the poor Christians every where in the Church of Rome are taught to place their confidence in more local Saints, than ever Heathen-Rome did muster of its Topical Gods? Which whether it grew upon that Church by the inundation of barbarous Nations; or that the late converted Paynims, before their hearts were throughly cleansed from their former leaven, did share the dignities and honours of the Heathen Gods amongst such Saints and Martyrs as they most affected, I will not take upon me to determine here. Certain I am, that a in very little time Rome-Christian came to have more tutelary Saints, and Patrons, and those of each Sex too, as their fancies led them, than ever, Heathen Rome could show Gods and Goddesses: whose Offices they have so divided amongst the Saints, that changing but the name, and perhaps the dress, the superstition is as gross now, as amongst the Gentiles. And this I speak, I am sure, on as good authority as any can be had in the Church of England, even from the very words of the book of Homilies, which doth state it thus 
(o) Homil. against Idolatry, part. 3. : What I pray you be such Saints with us, to whom we attribute the defence of certain Countries, spoiling GOD of his honour herein, but the Dii Tutelares of the Gentile Idolaters; such as were Belus to the Babylonians; Osiris and Isis to the Egyptians; Vulcan to the Lemnians. What are the Saints to whom the safeguard of certain Cities is appointed, but the Dii Praesides of the Gentiles; such as were Apollo at Delphos, Minerva at Athens, juno at Carthage, and the like. What be such Saints to whom contrary to the use of the Primitive Church, Temples and Churches be erected, and Altars builded, but the Dii Patroni; such as were jupiter in the CAPITOL, and Diana in the Temple of Ephesus. And where one Saint hath Images in divers places, and same Saint must have divers names, as had the Gods and Goddesses amongst the Gentiles. So that when you hear of our Lady of Ipswich, our Lady of Walsingham, our Lady of Wilsdon and such others; what can we think but that it is in imitation of the Heathen Idolaters, who had their Venus Cypria, their Venus Paphia, and their Venus Gnida; Dianae Agrotera, Diana Coryphea, and Diana Ephesia? Nor have they only spoiled the true living God of his due honour in Temples, Cities, Countries and Lands, by such inventions and devices as the Gentiles had done before them; but the Sea and waters have as well special Saints with them, as they had Gods with the Heathen; in whose places are come St. Christopher, St. Clement, and our Lady specially, to whom the Ship-men sing Ave Maris stella. Neither hath the fire escaped their Idolatrous inventions: for in stead of Vulcan and Vesta, they have placed St. Agatha, and make letters on her day to quench fire withal. Every Profession and Artificer hath his special Saint, as a peculiar God: as for example, Scholars have St. Nicolas; Painters St. Luke; neither lack Soldiers their Mars, or Lovers their Venus among Christians. Nay all diseases also have their special Saints, as Gods to cure them: the Pocks St. Roche, the Falling-evill Cornelius, the Toothache St. Apollin, etc. Neither do beasts and cattle lack their Gods with us; for St. Loy is the Horseleech, St. Anthony the Swineherd, & sic de cateris. Nor is this any studied calumny, but so clear a truth, that it was never yet gainsaid by their greatest Advocates; So much hath Rome relapsed to her ancient Gentilism; revived again so many of her Gods and Goddesses; that both the jews and Infidels may have cause to question, whether she doth believe in one God alone; or that he only is the Father Almighty whom the Creed here mentioneth. Of which and other of the Attributes of Almighty God I am next to speak.    

Articuli 1. pars 2da. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. i e. Patrem Omnipotentem. i e. The Father Almighty.  

CHAP. III. Of the Essence and Attributes of God according to the holy Scripture. The name of Father how applied unto God; of his Mercy, Justice, and Omnipotency.  
BY that which hath been said in the former Chapter, out of the Monuments and Records of the ancient Gentiles, it is apparent that they knew that there is a GOD, that he was one only, and that this one God was an Eternal and Immortal Spirit, existing of himself, without any beginning, invisible, incomprehensible, omnipotent, without change or passion. In which description we have all those Epithels summed up together out of the works and writings of those reverend Sages; which Ruffinus, a good Christian Writer of the Primitive times, hath bestowed upon him in his Exposition of the Creed. Deum cum audis, substantiam, intellige, sine initio, sine fine, simplicem, sine ulla admixtione, invisibilem, incorpoream, ineffabilem inaestimabilem, in quo nihil adjunctum, nihil creatum 
(a) Ruffin in Symb. . And though it could not be expected that the Gentiles guided only by the light of Nature should have said so much: yet for the better knowledge of the Essence, Attributes, and works of GOD we must not rest ourselves contented with that measure of light, which was discovered unto them, but make a more exact search for it in the holy Scriptures. Concerning which there is a memorable story of justin Martyr, which he relateth in his Dialogue with Trypho the jew. St. Paul hath noted of the Greeks, that they seek after wisdom 
(b) 1 Cor. 1.22. ; and never was the note more exactly true then in that particular. For being inflamed with a desire of coming to a more perfect knowledge of the Nature of GOD then had been generally attained by the common people; first he applied himself unto the Stoics, who by the gravity and preciseness of their conversation, did seem most likely to direct him. But this knowledge was not with the Stoic, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, nor could he learn much there of the nature of God 
(c) justin Mart. in dial. cum Tryph. . Next he betook himself to the Peripatetics, men most renowned for their knowledge in the works of Nature, and the subtleties of disputation. But there he profited less than before with the Stoics, the Peripatetics being more irresolute, and speaking less divinely of the things of GOD, than any of the other Sects of Philosophy. Then had he severally recourse unto the Pythagorean and the Platonist, who were most eminent in those times for the contemplative parts of learning, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and in the search of immaterials. But true Divinity was not to be found in all the writings either of the Pythagoreans or the Platonists; although these last did seem to come more near the truth, then either the Peripatetic, or the Stoic. At last he was encountered by a Reverend old man, a Christian Father, and was by him directed to the Book of God, writ by the Prophets and Apostles, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as they which only knew the truth, and which alone were able to unfold it rightly. The counsel of which Reverend man he obeyed full gladly, and profited so well in the Schools of CHRIST, that he became a Martyr for the Faith and Gospel. So we, if we would come unto the perfect knowledge of GOD, though we may sport ourselves, and refresh our thoughts in the pleasant walks and prospects of Philosophy; must at the last apply ourselves to the holy Scriptures, where we shall be as far instructed in the things of GOD, as he thinks fit to be communicated to the sons of men.  
Now for our better method in the present search, we will consider GOD in those names and Attributes, by which he hath made known himself in his holy Covenants. And first we meet with that of the Lord JEHOVAH; which the Greeks usually called the Tetragrammaton, or the name consisting of four letters, (for of no more it doth consist in the Hebrew language) the jews more properly nomen appropriatum & gloriosum, the most peculiar and most glorious name of the Lord our God, appropriated unto him in so strict a manner, that it was not lawful to communicate it unto any Creature. By this name was he first pleased to make himself known unto Moses, saying, that he had appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob by the name of God Almighty, but by this Name of Jehovah, he had not made himself known unto them 
(d) Exod. 6.3. . And in the Prophet Esay, thus, Ego sum Jehovah, illud est nomen meum, i. e. I am Jehovah, that is my Name, and my glory will I not give unto another 
(e) Esay 42.8. . Derived it is from jah, an old Hebrew root, which signifieth ens, existens, Being or existing. And hereupon was that when Moses in the third of Exod. v. 14. asked the name of GOD, the Lord returned this answer to him, I Am that I Am, and thus shalt thou say unto the people, I AM hath sent me unto you. And hereupon it was that St. JOHN calleth him in the Book of the Revelation, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is, which was, and which is to come 
(f) Apoc. 1.4. . Nor doth it signify alone a self-existence, by which he hath a Being in and of himself, and doth communicate a being unto all the creatures: but it is used in Scripture for a name of power, by which he governeth all those creatures, on which he hath been pleased to bestow a being. And therefore if we mark it well, though he appear unto us by the name of God in the first of Genesis, when the Creation was an Embryo, an imperfect work: yet he is no where called by the name of the Lord jehovah, till the Creation was accomplished, and his works made perfect: The Fathers hereupon observe (and the note is handsome) that the name of GOD is absolute, essential, and coeternal with the Deity; but that of JEHOVAH, or the Lord, not used, except in reference to the creature. And it is noted by Tertullian in his Book against Hermogenes, that in the first of Genesis it is often said, Deus dixit, Deus vidit, & Deus fecit, God said, and God saw, and God created. But that he was not called the Lord, by the name of JEHOVAH, till the second Chapter, when he had finished all his works, the Heaven and Earth, and all things in the same contained, and that there was some creature framed on which to exercise his Power and Supreme command. Ex quo creata sunt in quae potestas ejus ageret ex eo factus est & dictus DOMINUS 
(g) Tertul. adve s. Hermog. , (for by the word Dominus do the Latins render the name JEHOVAH, as the Greeks by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) as he telleth us there. In this regard, if possible there had been no other reason, it was a name or Attribute (call it which we will) which was not fit to be communicated unto any creatures, as many other of his names and Attributes have used to be. And this the jews so stood on in their later times of that State, that they would by no means give it to an earthly Prince: josephus the Historian 
(h) joseph. Antiqu. judaie. l. 2. c. 18.  telling us of some amongst them, whom no extremity of torment could enforce to confer this title on any of the Roman Emperors, though at that time they had their Country in subjection, and did Lord it over them. Had they stayed here, it had been well. No body could have grudged or murmurred, that GOD should have a name peculiar to himself alone, or that his name should not be mentioned otherwise then with fear and reverence. But afterwards it gave occasion to such superstitions, as made them subject to the scorn and censure of all other people; the use of that most sacred Name being forbade at all times upon pain of death: for fear forsooth, Ne quotidiano usu vilesceret 
(i) Buxdorfius in Lexic. Hebr. , lest the promiscuous use thereof should bring it into disesteem amongst the Vulgar. The very same reason, if you mark it, for which the Massing-Priest in the Church of Rome is bound to speak the words of Consecration in so low a voice, that the next slander by cannot hear a syllable. Ne se. vilescerent sacrosancta verba 
(k) Innocent. ●. de Sacro Alt▪ mist. l. 3. cap. 1. , lest they should grow into contempt with the common people.  
The second name which doth occur of GOD in the holy Scripture (for of Elijah which proceedeth from the same root, I forbear to speak) is that of Eloah in the singular, but most frequently that of Elohim in the plural number. It sigfieth the mighty judges, and is derived from Alah, which is to swear: because that in all weighty causes, when necessity requires an Oath to find out the truth, we are to swear only by the name of God, who is the righteous judge both of Heaven and Earth. For the most part it is rendered by the English GOD, and is first used by Moses in the first words of Genesis, 
(i) Gen. 1.1.  Bereshith bara Elohim, saith the Hebrew Text, In principio creavit Deus, saith the Vulgar Latin; in the beginning God created, saith the Modern English. Where Elohim, a Noun of the plural number, is joined with Bara, being a Verb of the singular number, to signify the Mystery of the glorious Trinity, as many of our late Divines have been pleased to note: though neither any of the old Translations which have been formerly in use in the Christian Church, did take notice of it; nor are constructions of that kind such strangers in the Hebrew tongue (as other learned men have noted) as that so high a mystery of the Christian faith should have no better grounds to stand on then so weak a Criticism. This name is generally rendered in Greek by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (whence the Latin Deus) and in English, GOD: and is not so peculiar to the heavenly Majesty, as not to be communicated sometimes to the creature also. For thus the Lord to Moses in the Book of Exodus, Ego constitui te Deum Pharaonis (the word is Elohim in the Hebrew) I have made thee a God unto Pharaoh 
(k) Exod. 7.1. , that is to say, I have made thee as a God unto him, to be the internuncio or Ambassador betwixt me and him. And in this sense it is appliable also unto Kings and Princes; as, Ego dixi, Dii estis, I have said, ye are Gods, Psal. 82. because they do participate of his Supreme Power, and are his Substitutes and Vicegerents here upon the Earth: in which respect they are called Potestates, Powers, in the very Abstract. The Powers that be (saith the Apostle) are ordained of GOD 
(l) Rom. 13.1. . And for the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (whence the Latin Deus) there are given us three Originations of it, all serviceable to set forth the nature of the glorious Godhead. For first it is derived 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which signifies to run, because of that swift motion which he seemeth to have, by being present in all places: those which conceived not the miracle of his Omnipresence, conjecturing at him by the swiftness and agility of motion. According unto that of Virgil 
(m) Virgil. Georg. lib. 4. , 
— Deum ire per omnes  
Terrasq tractusque maris, Coelumque profundum:  The very same with that of David, If I climb up into Heaven, thou art there, if I go down into Hell, thou art there also 
(n) Psa. 139.8. . A thing objected by Cecilius against the Christians, who had been well enough contented if they had only given him a Supreme direction over all worldly affairs: Sed quod loc is omnibus inter erret 
(o) Minut. Fel. , but that he should be present in all places also, that was conceived to be too great a prejudice to those many Gods whom the Gentiles worshipped and shut up in their several Temples. But of this more anon in a place more proper. The second Etymon of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is to see, according to another passage of the Prophet jeremy, 
(q) jerem. 3.24.  Can any man hide himself in secret places, so that I shall not see him, saith the Lord 
(r) Ibid. v. 7. ? In this respect the good old Father Irenaeus, hath affirmed of God, that he is totus oculus, totum lumen, all eye, all light: and Orpheus an old Heathen Poet tells us also of him, that though he be invisible, yet he seeth all things. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as Clemens citeth him in his Protrepticon, or Exhortation. The third and last is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to inflame or kindle, because that by the virtue of his heavenly power, he doth inflame our souls with the fire of zeal, and kindle a right spirit within us; Est deus in nobis, agitante calescimus illo 
(t) Ovid. de Fast. 1.6. , as in another case said the Heathen Poet.  
But leaving these Grammatical observations on the name of GOD, pass we on forwards to those other titles, by which he is presented to us in the holy Scripture, which are El, Helion, & Adonai. Of these the first is El, and signifieth as much as the strong God: GOD being not only strong in his own Essence, but giving strength and fortitude to all the creatures, according to their several natures. By this name Christ invoketh the assistance of his heavenly Father, saying, Eli, Eli 
(u) Mat. 27.46. , (or Eloi, Eloi 
(x) Mar. 15.34.  in the Syriack) My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? and by the same is called himself in the Prophet El Gibber, or the strong and most mighty GOD, Esa. 9.6. The next is Helion the most high, Altissimus; a name ascribed to God in both the Testaments, Pay thy vows to the most High, Psal. 50.14. the power of the most High, Luk. 50.32. the Son of the most High, Luk. 8.28. Most high, not only in respect of his habitation, because he hath his dwelling on High, Psal. 113. (in which respect the Heathen Poets said of their Idol-Iupiter, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(y) Hesiod. in. Noct. & dies. , that he dwelleth in the Highest Heavens) but in relation to his Essence, by which he infinitely exceeds all creatures, both in Heaven and Earth, who in comparison of him are but toys and trifles. So little reason have we to be proud of our earthly fortunes, or of our natural parts and graces; that rather looking whence we are, made of dust and ashes, the thought thereof should humble us in the sight of God, and make us have recourse to him to obtain perfection. The last we meet with in this kind, (for still we are upon those Names or Attributes which are both absolute in God, and Essential to him) is that of Adonai, or my Lord. A name, as it is noted in the Mazoreth, found of itself no more than 134 times in all the Old Testament, but substituted by the Modern superstitious jews, in the place of jehovah, as often as they meet that word in the course of the Text. A name derived by the learned from the Hebrew Eden, which signifieth a Basis or foundation, on which the whole building doth rely: and therefore very fitly chosen to express his nature, who beareth up the pillars of the Earth, as the Psalmist hath it; by whom the whole fabric of the Universe is preserved in being. These are the names or Titles of Almighty God, by which he hath made known himself to his chosen servants, all of them absolutely his, without relation to the creature, and such as rather serve to declare his Essence, than set forth his office: for Deus est nomen naturae non officii, as St. Ambrose hath it. All of them laid together teach us this of GOD, that he is of a self-existing, of infinite power, of incomprehensible strength, and unspeakable Majesty: and that as he hath all this of himself alone, so like an Universal Parent, he communicates a being to all the creatures, and doth endue them with so much of his power and wisdom, of his strength and Majesty, as shall suffice to every one in their several places. Not that the creature doth partake of his heavenly Essence, we conceive not so; but that he is the principal and Original cause by which all creatures have an Essence: non ut de essentia ejus, sed ut causa essendi 
(a) Aquin. in Summa Theol. , as Aquinas stateth it: and that having thus received an essence or a being from him, we receive also out of his abundance all additaments of what sort soever, which are expedient for us in our several callings. For out of his fullness we have all received 
(b) Joh. 7.16. , as we are told by the Apostle.  
Now by the knowledge of these names, or rather of the nature of God represented in them, we come unto the knowledge of those real attributes, which are so proper and peculiar to the Lord our God, as not to be communicated unto any creature; of which we must first speak a little, in the way of groundwork or foundation, before we can behold him as the Father Almighty: And these are principally two, simplicitas, and infinitas. Simplicitas, or the simpleness of God, if we may so call it, is that whereby he is void of all composition, either of matter and form, or parts and accidents compounding, whether they be sensible or intelligible only. For whereas all corporal substances are compounded of matter and form, and the angelical natures of a potentia and an actus, as the Schoolmen phrase it: GOD being incorporeal hath no matter of form; and being wholly existing, all at once together, must be purus actus, not having any thing in potentia, which at first he had not. For if GOD were compounded of matter and form, there must be some pre-existent matter out of which he was made; and if he be compounded of potentia and actus, he must and may be somewhat which at first he was not: both which are so destructive of the nature of GOD, as being once admitted, he is God no longer. And therefore in my mind the judicious Scaliger hath very well determined of it, in these following words, 
(c) Scalig. Exercit. 6. Sect. 2.  Intelligentiae habent aliquid simile materiae, aliquid simile formae. Solus Deus simplex est, in quo nihil in potentia, sed in actu omnia; imo ipse purus, primus, medius, ultimus actus: that is to say, The Angels or Intelligences have something proportionable unto matter, and something which resembleth form. God only is a simple uncompounded essence, in whom there is nothing in potentia, but all things in act: he being a pure act himself, and the first, intervenient, and last act of all. God then is in the first place a simple, or uncompounded essence, without parts or accidents: his attributes not differing from his essence at all, but being of his very essence, (for in Deo non est nisi Deus, as the old rule was); nor differing essentially from one another, but only in regard of our weak understanding: which being not able to know or comprehend the earthly things by one single act, must of necessity have many distinct acts and notions, to comprehend the nature of the incomprehensible God. And being such a simple uncompounded essence without parts or accidents, he is both great without quantity, and good without quality, merciful without passion, every where without motion, in heaven without a place or ubi.  
The second Attribute of God which before we spoke of, is that of Infiniteness, by which God is absolutely and actually infinite in his acts and essence. And this infinite or infiniteness, is defined to be that without which nothing is or can be. Infinitum est extra quod nihil est, said the old Philosophers: so that it is impossible for any thing to be without or besides that, before or after that, in which all possible being is comprehended. And this infinity doth branch itself into these four species, that is to say, Infinity in regard of duration, which we call Eternity. 2. Infinity in regard of dimensions, which we call Immensity. 3. Infinity in regard of comprehensions, by which we say that God is of infinite wisdom, and of infinite knowledge. And last of all, Infinity in regard of power, which we call Omnipotence. And first, Infinity in regard of duration, which we call Eternity, is that attribute of the Lord our God, by which he is without beginning or end; without beginning of days, or end of time; without succession or precession, if I may so speak. Or else we may define it with Boetius to be the entire or total possession of interminable life, all at once together: or otherwise thus, to be a circular duration, whose instants are always, and whose terminations of extremities never were nor shall be, which are the words of Trismegistus with some little change. In this respect God took unto himself this name, I AM, or I AM THAT I AM: all time being present unto God, as is also that infinity which was before the beginning of time, and shall be also as it is, when time itself shall be no more. In this regard he tells us also of himself, that he is A and Ω, 
(e) Apocal. 21.6 c. 1.4.  or the first or the last, which was, and is, and is to come; still the same for ever. And finally in this respect it is said by Tertullian, Ante omnia Deus erat solus, et erat sibi tempus, mundus et omnia, i. e. 
(f) Tertul. advers. Praxeam.  Before all things were, God was, and he was also to himself, time, the world, and all things. He was alone, quia nil aliud extrinsecus praeter illum, because there was not any thing without or besides him: and yet not then alone, if we weigh it rightly, Habebat enim Deum quod habebat in semet ipso, etc. for he had always with him that divine wisdom, which he had always in himself. And so the old Philosophers are to be expoonded when they say of God, that he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, immortal and eternal, or everlasting; that is to say, not only a part post, as Angels and the souls of men are called mortal; but also a part ante, which none was but God. Which makes up that conclusion of the royal Psalmist, Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever the earth and the world were made, thou art God from everlasting, and world without end 
(g) Psal. 90.2. ; world without end a part post, from everlasting also, a part ante, but in both eternal.  
Of the same nature is that infiniteness in Almighty God in respect of dimensions, which by a name distinct may be called immensity, whereby he is of infinite extension, not circumscribed with any bounds, filling all places whatsoever, but contained of none. Of this immensity or unmeasurableness doth the Prophet speak, saying, Who hath measured the waters in the hollow of his Hand, and meted out heaven with his span, and comprehended the dust of the earth in his three fingers, (after such a manner as men take up a dust or sand) and weighed the mountains with scales, and the hills in a balance 
(b) Isa. 40.12, 15, 17. . Who taketh up the Isles as a very little thing, before whom all nations are as nothing, as the drop of a bucket. This by an other name, and in other respects is also called ubiquity, or Omnipresence, by which our GOD is present in all places every where, and confined to none: but as a sphere (as very understandingly said Trismegistus) whose Centre is every where, his circumference no where. In reference to this we find it said by Moses of the Lord our God, that he is God in Heaven above, and in the earth below 
(i) Deut. 4 39 . The very same with that of the royal Psalmist, If I climb up into Heaven, thou art there; if I go down into Hell, thou art there also 
(k) Ps. 139.8. . And so we have it both in Moses and in the Psalms. In reference unto this it is said by jeremy, Do not I fill Heaven and Earth, saith the Lord? 
(l) jer. 23.7, 24,  And, Can any man hide himself in secret places that I shall not see him? And so we have it in the Law and the Prophets too. And though the Gentiles did exceedingly stomach at the primitive Christians, for giving this ubiquity or Omnipresence to their Lord and God, Discurrentem scilicet illum volunt et ubique praesentem 
(m) Minut. Fel. , as Cecilius in the Dialogue did object against them: yet did the Fathers of all times stand most stoutly to it, and would not yield a jot to their importunities. For thus saith the renowned Augustine, Deus meus ubique praesens, ubique totus, nusquam inclusus 
(u) August de civet. dei. l. 1.29 , My GOD saith he, is in all places present, in all places wholly, but so in all places as contained in none. More fully Gregory the great, Deus est intra omnia non inclusus, extra omnia non exclusus, supra omnia non elatus; i. e. 
(o) Gregor. in Psal. 139.  GOD is in all things, but not enclosed; he is without all things, but not excluded; he is above all things, but not lifted up; and finally beneath all things, and yet not depressed. And though it may be truly said of the sons of men, Qui ubique est, nusquam est; he that is every where, is no where: that is to say, he that engageth himself in every business, will go thorough with none: yet so it cannot be affirmed of the God of Heaven, unless perhaps it be in a qualifyed sense, interpreting nusquam esse, by non includi. And in that sense is that saying of St. Bernard exactly verified, Nusquam est, et ubique est: i. e. He is no where, because no place either real or imaginary can comprehend or contain him; and he is every where, because no body, no space, nor spiritual substance can exclude his presence.  
Proceed we next to the third species or kind of infiniteness, which we called the infinity of comprehensions, by which all things whatsoever, as well things future, as things past, are alike present to him, and for ever before him; by which he knoweth things that are not as if they were, and doth accordingly decree and determine of them, with as much perspicacity of wisdom, and infallibility of judgement, as if they were actually before his eyes. For first, God being of an infinite knowledge, most perfectly and simply knoweth all things in himself, which ever were, or shall be in the times to come: and then being of an infinite wisdom to dispose of all things, as may conduce most to his honour and glory; hath either given them bounds which they shall not pass, or left them a dispositive power of their own occasions; putting upon things necessary the law of necessity, and leaving things contingent to the lot of contingency. The due consideration of which weighty point, brought the Apostle to cry out, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, O the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God 
(p) Rom. 11.33. ! Which two, though two distinct acts and attributes in our apprehension, yet differ not in GOD, as before was said, nor perhaps very much in themselves at all. For wisdom is but the excellency of knowledge, consisting either in the dignity or usefulness of the matter known, or the more perfect manner of discerning what they truly are. And of this wisdom or more useful kind of knowledge, there are these two offices, the one steadfastly to propose a right end; the other to present a right choice of means for effecting thereof. But being it is equally consonant to God's infinite wisdom, and not a whit derogatory to his infinite power, that some things should be as truly contingent, as other are really and truly necessary: therefore hath God been pleased as well to decree contingency, as to decree or fore-determine of necessity. Hereupon it will follow by good rules of Logic, that though there be an immutability in the counsels of God, arising from the infiniteness of his knowledge and wisdom; yet that there are some things which might not have been, and that some things are not which yet might have been, or might have been far otherwise then now they are. For neither is the prescience or foreknowledge of almighty God (for by that name his infinite knowledge may be styled) the necessary and adequate cause that things shall fall out as they do, not otherwise; but rather because things shall in time so fall out, therefore GOD foreknows them. Nor doth his infinite wisdom in pursuit of the means conducing to the end proposed, so fetter and entangle his most infinite power, but that he is still liberum agens, and is at liberty to produce his end by things plainly contingent, as well as by such whereon he hath imposed an everlasting necessity; or to suspend the execution of some former edict, according as he seeth just occasion for it, which liberty in the holy one of Israel is an high perfection. For as his eternal knowledge of all things doth not make all things which he knoweth to be eternal: so neither doth the immutability of his decrees make every thing which he decrees to be immutable; there being many temporal and mutable things which he eternally both knew and decreed accordingly. So that for GOD to alter his proceedings with men, according as they stand or fall in the acts of piety, now punishing where he lately rewarded, and presently rewarding where before he punished, argueth no mutability in the counsels of GOD, but rather an unmovable constancy to the immutable rule of justice, which being always one and the same without variation, must needs afford different measure unto different deserts, and sit contrary dispositions with contrary recompenses. And on the other side to make this conclusion, that because God foreknoweth by his infinite knowledge, and by his infinite wisdom hath decreed of all things even from all eternity; therefore it is as impossible for any thing to be otherwise then it is, or otherwise then it hath been or will be hereafter, as to recall again that which is passed already: were either to make GOD an impertinent agent in the continual governance of humane affairs, or that he hath nothing else to do but to behold the issue of his former counsels. For plainly they which so conceive of the counsels of GOD, that all things are decreed and predetermined by him, even to the taking up of a straw; (which was Cartwrights 
(q) Ap. Hook. Eccl. Polit.  phrase) although they have not said it in terms express, yet do they necessarily infer or involve thus much: That God by his eternal and immutable decrees did set the whole course of nature going with an irresistible and untractable swinge; and doth since only look upon it with an awful eye, as Masters sometimes watch their servants, to see how willingly or unwillingly, how carefully or negligenly they attend his business. Which how derogatory it is to the truth of the Gospel, those words of CHRIST, Et pater adhuc operatur 
(r) Joh. 5.17. , i. e. I work and my Father also worketh, do declare sufficiently: it being evident by that Text, if considered rightly, that there is altogether as much need of God's power and wisdom, to manage and direct the affairs of the world, as at first to make it.  
Thus are we come at last to the fourth and last species of Infinity, which is that of Power or of Omnipotence, and therein to behold GOD as the Father Almighty: the Father, because the fountain and root of being; and the Almighty Father too, because that being in himself an eternal being, he had withal a power invested or inherent in him, to give a being to the Creatures, and to make all things out of nothing, which needs must be the act of a power most mighty. To this, the former part of this Chapter served but as a preamble, or a necessary introduction to bring us to the knowledge of this part of the Article, viz. That GOD is not only a Father, but a Father Almighty: which could not otherwise have been fully cleared and made known unto us, then by a serious looking on him in his names and attributes. For finding in the name JEHOVAH that he is existing of himself, and that from him all things that are receive their being; his mighty strength in the name of El, his eminent power in that of Adonai or Lord; that he is God most high in Helion, and a Judge in Elohim: and then concluding out of these, that being such, he must be of an uncompounded, and most simple essence; by consequence, eternal, and incomprehensible, of infinite knowledge to foresee, and wisdom to effect what he meaneth to do; we may from all together come to this result, that he can be no other than the Father Almighty. And this was the result which was made of old by the most learned of the Gentiles: who having made a muster of his several Attributes, resolved all into this at last, that he was the general Father both of God and Men, the Parent of the Universe, both of Heaven and Earth; and therefore without question an Almighty Father. Mercurius Trismegistus calleth him in terms express, Patrem mundi 
(s) Trismegist. in Paemand. c. 2, 3. etc. , the Father or Parent of the world; affirming that the name of good, and of a Father, belong only to him: and so Pythagoras calls him too, as is said by Clement. Plato entitled him Universi Patrem, the Father or Parent of the Universe. jamblichus one of Plato's followers, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or self-father, as before was noted. By Aristotle in his book de Mundo, he is called Pater deorum et hominum, the Father both of Gods and Men; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the words of Homer; By Virgil in the same sense, Hominum sator atque Deorum, in the first of the Aeneids; By Orpheus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Original Ancester of all; and by Apollo himself, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the unspeakable Father. And for the titile of Almighty, I find it given expressly to him in a verse of one of the Sibyls, where he is called, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. e. Omnipotent, invisible, and yet seeing all things. The like doth frequently occur in the Latin Poets, who call him the Almighty Father in as positive terms, as he is called here in the Creed. Tum Pater Omnipotens foecundis imbribus, etc. And in another place, At pater Omnipotens speluncis abdidit atris, as we read in Virgil. At Pater Omnipotens misso perfregit Olympum, etc. so it is in Ovid 
(x) Ovid Met. l. 1. . And by Valerius Soranus one of elder times, their jupiter, or supreme deity had the title of Almighty, and King of Kings assigned unto him, jupiter Omnipotens, Regum Rex ipse Deusque, as St. Augustine 
(y) August. de Civit. dei. l. 7.  citeth him out of Varro. More might be added unto this, were not this sufficient to show that even the learned Gentiles did acknowledge God to be the Father Almighty. We must next see, how and in what respects he is called a Father, and doth stand so entitled in the front of the Creed.  
And first the name of Father as applied to God in holy Scripture, is taken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Personally, as it denotes the first person in the Oeconomie of the glorious Trinity. There are three that bear record in heaven, (as St. john hath it) the Father, the Word, and the holy Ghost, and these three are one 
(a) 1 Joh. 5.7. . And in this notion or acception of the word, GOD is the father of our Lord and Saviour JESUS CHRIST, whom he hath begotten to himself before all worlds, generatione 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by such a kind of generation, as neither the tongue of Men nor Angels can express aright. In this respect our Saviour saith of GOD the first person, I and my Father are one 
(b) Joh. 10.30. : and in another place, which we saw before on another occasion, I work, and my Father also worketh 
(c) Joh. 5.17. . In this sense God the Father saith of the second person, This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased 
(d) Mat. 3.17. . And finally in this, as no man living, no not any of the host of Heaven, is to be called the Son of God but the second Person; so none of the three Persons takes the name of Father, but the first alone. Though GGD hath several sons, and by several means, as shall be showed anon in the place fit for it; yet only CHRIST is called his begotten son: and therefore God a natural Father (if I may so say) unto none but him. And this is that which Gregory Thaumaturgus hath told us, saying, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(e) Greg. Thaumat. in S. Theophan. , God hath no other son by nature, but thee my Saviour. The name of this generation I forbear to speak of. It is a point I waived from the very first, when first I undertook to expound this Creed 
(f) Vid. Chap. 1. ; as being of too sublime and transcendent nature for the shallowness of my capacity to inquire into. It is enough that I acknowledge God to be the Father of our Lord JESUS CHRIST, by an eternal generation: though I profess myself unable to discourse thereof, with any satisfaction to myself or others. And for the generation of our Saviour in the fullness of time, by which he was conceived of the Virgin Mary, I shall have opportunity to speak in a place more proper. So that not having more to speak of the name of Father, as it is personal and hypostatical in the first Person only; I shall proceed to that acception of the word, wherein it is taken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or essentially, and so given to GOD, that every person of the Trinity doth partake thereof. But first I cannot choose but note that even in that equality or unity which is said to be between the Persons of the blessed Trinity, the Father seems to me to have some preeminency above the others. For not only the Greek Church doth acknowledge him to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the root and fountain of the Godhead; but it is generally agreed on by all Orthodox writers, that the Father is first in order, though not in time: Pater est prior ordine, non tempore, as Alstedius states it; and by Aquinas amongst those of the Church of Rome, that the Son or second person is Principiatus non essentiatus 
(i) Aqu. Summ. , that is to say, if I rightly understand his meaning, that there was a beginning of his existence though not of his essence, or a beginning of his Filiation, but not of his Godhead. And yet I dare not say that I hit his meaning, (for I profess myself uncapable of these Schoole-niceties) because I find it generally agreed on by most learned men, 
(k) V. Field of the Ch. l. 5. c. 11.  that CHRIST receiveth the being and essence which he hath from the Father; although not in the way of production of an other essence, which was condemned as an impious heresy in Valentinus Gentilis, but by communication of the same. Add here, that those who have most constantly stood up in the defence of the doctrine of the Trinity against some Heretics of this Age, do notwithstanding say and declare in public, that CHRIST though looked upon as the Son of God in his eternal generation, cannot be said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or self-essentiate: And that both Genebrard 
(m) Genebr. de Trin. l. 1. & Lindan. in Dubitant. l. 2. , Lindanus and some others of the Romish Doctors have quarrelled. Calvin (whom Beza laboureth to excuse in that particular) for saying that he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and hath his Godhead from himself; wherein he is deserted by Arminius also 
(n) Armin. Respons. ad Artic. 31. , and those of the Remonstrant party in the Belgic Countries. But that the Father Almighty mentioned in my Creed was not, and is not, both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 too, hath never been affirmed, nor so much as doubted of, by any Christian writer of what times soever.  
Next look we on the name of Father as it is taken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 essentially in the holy Scriptures, and then it is appliable to every person of the blessed Trinity; each of which in his several person or subsistence, may be called our Father. Thus read we of the second person (for of the first there is no question to be made) in the 9 of Esay, that unto us a Son is born, and that he shall be called wonderful, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, Vers. 6. Thus in St. james, we find that the holy Ghost is called Pater luminum, 
(o) Jam. 1. 7.  the Father of lights; it being his office to illuminate every soul which is admitted for a member of the Church of CHRIST: in which respect the Sacrament of Baptism, in which men are regenerated and born again of water and the holy Spirit, was anciently called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or illumination. The reason why the name Father doth in this sense belong respectively to each, is because they equally concur, as in the work of Creation, God the Father creating the world in the Son by the holy Ghost; so in those also of Redemption and Sanctification. From whence that maxim of the Schools, Opera Trinitatis ad extra sunt indivisa, that is to say, the outward or external actions of the Trinity, are severally communicable to the whole essence of GOD, and not appropriated unto any particular person. And yet the name of Father even in this acception is generally, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and in the common course of speech referred to the first Person only; as he that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the root and fountain of the Godhead, as before was said. For thus hath CHRIST himself instructed us to pray, and say, Our Father which art in heaven, 
(q) Mat. 6.9. . And the Church following his command who hath willed us to pray after that manner, beginneth many of her prayers in the public Liturgy, with this solemn form of compellation, Almighty and most merciful Father. Not that we do exclude the Son or the holy Ghost, in our devotions, but include them in him. In Patre invocantur filius et spiritus sanctus, 
(r) Bellarm. de Chr. l. 8. c. 17.  as Bellarmine hath most truly noted. And therefore though we commonly begin our prayers with a particular address to God the Father, yet we conclude them all with this, through Christ jesus our Lord; and sometimes add, to whom with thee and the holy Ghost, be praise for ever. But leaving these more intricate speculations to more subtle heads; The name of Father in this sense, is ascribed to God by two several titles.  
First, jure Creationis, by the right of Creation, by which he is the Father of all mankind.  
And secondly, jure Adoptionis, by the right and title of Adoption, by which he hath anew begotten us (in St. Peter's language) to an inheritance immortal, undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved for us in the Heavens 
(s) 1 Pet. 1.3, 4. .  
First, GOD is said to be our Father in the right of Creation, by which as all the World, and all things in the same contained, may be called the workmanship of his hands; so may all mankind be called his children: not only those which trust and believe in him, but also those which know him not, nor ever read so much of him as the Book of nature; those which yet live as outlaws from the rule of reason, and barbarous and savage people of both the Indies. Thus Malachi, the last Prophet of the jews, Have we not all one Father, hath not God created us 
(t) Mal. 2.10. ? Thus the Apostle of the Gentiles doth affirm of GOD, that out of one blood he hath made all kindreds of men 
(u) Act. 17.26. . And CHRIST himself, who broke down the partition wall between jew and Gentile, Call no man Father on Earth, for one is your Father which is in Heaven 
(x) Mat. 23.9. . Not that the Lord would have us disobedient to our natural Parents, or ashamed to own them; for this is plainly contrary both to Law and Gospe●t: but that we should refer our being unto him alone which is the fountain of all being. Solus vocandus est Pater qui creavit 
(y) Lactant. instit. l. 4 c 4. , said Lactantius truly. Now God is said to be our Father by the right of Creation, for these following reasons: as first, because he was the Father of the first man Adam, out of whose loins we are descended, or of whose likeness since the fall we are all begotten. Therefore St. Luke when he had made the Genealogy of our Saviour CHRIST in the way of ascent, doth conclude it thus, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the Son of God 
(z) Luk. 3.38. : the son of God, but not by generation, for so our Saviour only was the Son of God, and therefore it must be by Creation only. Secondly, GOD is called our Father, because he hath implanted in our Parents the virtue Generative, moulded and fashioned us in the secret closerts of the Womb. Thy hands have made me and fashioned me 
(a) Psal. 119. . Thine eyes did see my substance being yet imperfect, and in thy book were all my members written, saith the Royal Psalmist 
(b) Psa. 139.15. . The bodies of us men are too brave a building for man and Nature to erect. And therefore said Lactantius truly, Hominem non patrem esse sed generandi ministrum 
(c) Lactan●. l. 5.19. . Man only is the instrument which the Lord doth use for the effecting of his purpose, to raise that godly edifice of flesh and blood which he contemplates in his children. Last of all for our souls, which are the better part of us, by which we live, and move, and have our being, they are infused by GOD alone; man hath no hand in it. God breathes into our nostrils the breath of life, and by his mighty power doth animate and inform that matter, which of itself is merely passive in so great a wonder. In each of these respects, and in all together, we may conclude with that of Aratus, an old Greek Poet, as he is cited by S. Paul 
(d) Act. 17.28. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, for we are all his offspring, all of us his children.  
The second Interest which GOD hath in us as a Father, in the way of adoption, by which we are regenerate, or anew begotten to a lively hope of being heirs unto the promises, and in the end partakers of eternal glories: by which we are transplanted from our Father's house, and out of the Wilderness and unprofitable Thickets of this present world, and graffed or inoculated on the Tree of life. Adoptare enim est juxta delectum sibi quos quisque velit in filios eligere 
(e) Mincing. in Instit. l. 1. c. 11. . Adoption is the taking of a child from another family, to plant and cherish in our own, say, the Civil Lawyers: and he that so adopteth may be called our Father; by approbation of the laws, though not by nature. Examples of this case have been very ordinary, from Moses who was adopted for her son by the daughter of Pharaoh, (though he refused to be called the son of Pharaohs daughter 
(f) Heb. 11.24. , as St. Paul said of him) down through all the stories both of Greece and Rome. And if it may be lawful to make such resemblances, the motives which induced GOD to proceed this way, and other the particulars of most moment in it, do seem to carry a fair proportion or correspondency with such inducements and particulars, as hath been used by men on the same occasions. For in the Laws adoption was to be allowed but in these four cases 
(g) Mincing. in loco citato. ;  
First, Quod quidam Matrimonii onera detrectarent, because some men could not away with the cares of Wedlock.  
Secondly, Quod conjugium esset sterile, because God had not blessed the marriage with a fruitful issue.  
Thirdly, Quod liberi ipsorum morerentur, because their own children by untimely death, or the unlucky chance of War, had been taken from them; in which last case, adoption by especial dispensation, was allowed to women.  
Fourthy, Quod liberi ipsorum improbi essent & degeneres, because their own children were debauched and shameless, likely to ruin that estate, and disgrace that family into which they were born. And upon such grounds as these, is GOD in Scripture said to adopt the Gentiles; to make them who by nature were the sons of wrath, and seemed to be excluded from the Covenant which he made with Abraham, to be the heirs of God, and Coheirs with Christ. God looked upon the jews as his natural children. And at the first one might have known them easily for the sons of God, by the exemplary piety of their lives and actions: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. as men know commonly their neighbour children by a resemblance to their Fathers 
(h) Basil. Epist. ad Gregor. . St. Paul hath made a muster of some chiefs amongst them in the 11. chap. to the Heb. But they being took away by the hand of death, there next succeeded in their room a generation little like them in the course of their lives, and therefore little to the comfort of their heavenly Father. For his part he was never wanting unto his Vineyard 
(i) Esai. 4.4. ; nor could there any thing be done to it, which he did not do, yet when he looked for grapes in their proper season, it brought forth nothing but wild grapes, sit only for the wine-press of his indignation. So that the Lord was either childless, or else the Father of a stubborn and perverse generation, of whose reclaim there was no hopes, or but small, if any. In which estate he cast his eyes opon the Gentiles, who either knew him not at all, or knew no more of him then they could discern through the false lights, as it were, of depraved nature, or the dull spectacles of Philosophy. Thus witnesseth St. Paul in the 4. to the Galatians, saying, that when the fullness of time was come, God sent his Son made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem those which were under the law, that they might receive the Adoption of sons, vers. 5. And in the 8. unto the Romans, We have, saith he, received the Spirit of Adoption, whereby we cry unto him Abba, Father: the Spirit of God bearing witness with our spirit, that we are the heirs of God, and coheirs with CHRIST, vers. 15.  
Other particulars there are, wherein the Adoption of us sinners to the Kingdom of Heaven, holds good proportion with Adoptions made upon the earth; some of which I shall briefly touch at, to make the mystery of our Adoption the more clear and signal. First then, Adoption by the Civil or Imperial Laws, (which is jus Gentium or the Law of Nations, as they use to call it) however privately agreed upon between the parties, was never counted valid & of good authority, till it was verified by the Magistrates before all the people, in the Town-Hall, or Common Forum, and under such a form of words, which either law or custom had prescribed unto them. Which form of words too long to be repeated here, are extant still in Gellius 
(k) A. Gell. No●t. Att. , and Barnabas Brissonius a late French Writer. So our adoption unto life is ratified and confirmed unto us by the public Minister openly in the Church, in the Congregation, if it may conveniently; and under such a Form of words which we may not alter. We have not only custom for it, but a strict command, that we baptise all those which are presented to the Church as the children of God, In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Ghost. We find it also in the practice, though the law required it not, that they who were adopted into any family used presently 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(l) Dion. Cass. in Augusto. , to take unto themselves the name of that house o● family into the which they were assumed. Examples of this truth are infinite almost, and obvious in the Roman stories. So we, being adopted into the kingdom and inheritance of our Saviour CHRIST, have took unto ourselves Christ's name, or the name of Christians. And the Disciples were first called Christians at Antiochia, Act. 11. Suppose we now that our adoption is confirmed, ratified by the Magistrate, and good in law, are we hereby exempted from the power of our Natural Parents? Not so, the Law is otherwise, and resolves it clearly, Quod jura Patris naturalis minime solvuntur 
(m) justin. Instit. l. 1. tit. 11. sect. 2. , that the authority of our Natural Parents is the same as formerly. Too many of us think not so, but being once possessed with a conceit of our adoption to the kingdom of God, we cast off all obedience and regard of man. Neither our Natural, nor our Civil Parents are to be obeyed, if once the Son of God hath but made us free. Thus did the Anabaptists preach in some parts of Germany; and we have had too many followers of their Doctrines here. And last of all it is a Rule or Maxim in the Laws Imperial, that children once adopted, are to be used and disposed of in all respects, ac si justis nuptiis quaesiti 
(n) Ibid. l. 2. tit. 13. s●ct. 4. , as if they were our own by the law of Nature. And it doth follow thereupon, Haeredes vel instituendi vel exhaeredandi, that as we think it fit, and as they deserve, we may assign them portions out of our estates, or exclude them utterly. Whether it be thus also in adoptions unto life eternal, whether it may not be revoked at the pleasure of GOD, if we behave ourselves unworthily; need not be made a question amongst rational men. Or if it be, I have no list nor leisure to dispute it here. Only I cannot choose but note it as an error in Monsieur de Moulin, to ground the irreversible Decree of our Adoption to the Kingdom of Heaven, on the like irreversibleness of adoptions here upon the Earth: Ex eo quod absoluta sit inter homines adoptio, as his own words are 
(o) Molin. Anatom. Arm. c. 22. sect. 9 . But Absque hoc. The law we see is otherwise, and resolves the contrary. And for the error of du Moulin, being it is ignorantia juris, an error in point of law, and not of fact, whether, and if at all it may be excused, I leave to be resolved upon grave advice by some such learned Casuist, as his friend Amesius.  
GOD is a Father then by all ways and means by which a name of Father may be gained by any: And if a Father, as he is, no doubt but we shall find in him the same affections, which are in Parents towards their children: the same, but not with all or any of those imperfections, which we observe to be too often intermingled in humane affections. Do Parents naturally love their children? We find the love of GOD to his, not only to be equal unto that of an earthly father, but to surpass the love of women. Can a woman forget her sucking child, that she should not have compassion on the fruit of her womb? yes saith the Lord, they may forget, but I will not forget my people 
(p) Esa. 49.15. . Do Parents out of the affection which they bear their children, provide them of all necessaries for this present life? Do any of them, if their children ask for bread, give them a stone 
(q) Mat. 7.10. , or if they ask for a fish, present him a Serpent? Our Saviour thereupon inferreth, that if they being evil know how to give good gifts unto their children, how much more should our Father which is in Heaven, give good things unto them that ask him 
(r) Ibid. v. 11.  Assuredly the love of GOD to all his children, especially to those which walk after his commandments, is infinitely greater than the love of our natural parents to those which are the children after the flesh. Out of this love of GOD it is, that he giveth us both the former and the latter rain, that he makes his Sun to shine on the good and bad; that their Oxen are alike strong to labour, that their sheep bring forth thousands, yea and ten thousands in their streets; and finally that their fields do laugh, and their meadows sing with fruitful plenty. Are parents naturally compassionate towards their children, when they fall into misery and distress; and pity them at least, if they cannot help them? Behold, saith God, like as a Father pitieth his own children, so the Lord pitieth them that fear him: for he knoweth whereof we are made, he remembreth that we are but dust 
(s) Psal. 103.13, 14. . Are parents patient and long-suffering towards their children when they do amiss? Alas, what is this patience of theirs, compared to that of GOD towards sinful man. The Lord is full of compassion, and mercy, long-suffering, and of great goodness, saith the Prophet David 
(t) Ibid. v. 8. . O Jerusalem, Heirusalem, saith the son of David, how often would I have gathered thee together as a Hen doth her Chickens, but ye would not 
(u) Mat. 23.37.  But is the patience of a Father so implanted in him, that it can never be worn out, and converted to anger. Not so, we know it is a proverb, that patientia laesa fit furor, the greatest patience if abused, may possibly be turned to the greatest fury, or anger at the least in the highest degree. How angry was old jacob with his two sons, the Brethren in evil, when he desired his soul might not come into their secret 
(x) Gen. 49.6, 7. ; and prayed to God to scatter them in Jacob, and divide them in Israel? And cannot God be angry think we, with his stubborn and rebellious children, when they do wilfully transgress his holy laws, and with an high hand violate all his sacred precepts? Why then doth he so often punish those that do amiss? for, Ira Dei non est aliud quam voluntas puniendi 
(y) August. de Cru. Dei. l. 15.15. , as St. Augustine hath it, the anger of God is only his just will to chastise the sinner. Why then did he repent of his making man, or rain down fire and brimstone upon Sodom and Gomorrah, as it is said he did? Why then do we beseech him with such shame and sorrow, to correct us in his judgement and not in his fury, that we may not be consumed and brought to nothing 
(z) Jer. 10.24. ? He that bids us be angry and sin not 
(a) Phil. 4.20. , intended not the extirpation but the moderation of anger. And thereupon Lactantius very well inferreth, Qui ergo iras●i nos jubet, ipse utique irascitur 
(b) Lactant. de ira Dei. : he that bids us be angry (so we do not sin) can without doubt be angry too when he seeth occasion. The like may be affirmed also of those other affections which are in Parents towards those whom they have begotten. Remove the imperfections from them, and the affections of themselves after separation, may without any danger, (and as some Schoolmen think, without any Metaphor) be ascribed to GOD.  
Now out of those affections which before we specified, ariseth the chief care of our natural parents, which is to see us trained up in some lawful trades, or in the knowledge of good letters: that being put into a course of good education, we may subsist with credit, and escape those miseries which poverty and necessity may else bring upon us. And out of that authority which they have by nature to dispose of us as they see most suitable unto our deserts, ariseth the chief power of our natural parents, either to make us heirs of their goods and fortunes, or to leave us out. First, for the care of education, it seemed so necessary to the Grecians in the former times, that one of their Wisemen did use to say, Praestat non nasci, that it was better not to be born, than not well instructed. And by the laws of Rome, which they had from Greece, when as the father now grown old and out of work, did sue his son for alimony, as we use to call it; it was a good plea in the son against his Father, that he had never taken care of his education, or trained him in the knowledge of any Art, either ingenuous or mechanic 
(d) Leg. 12. Tab. . Filius arte carens Patris incuria, eidem necessaria vitae subsidia ne praestato, was one of the laws of the twelve Tables. How much more necessary must we think that part of our education, which the wise Grecian never knew, nor ever was prescribed by the laws of Rome: that part I mean, by which young children are instructed in the fear of GOD, and taught betimes to run the paths of the Lords commandments? But if the Father do his office, if that no care be wanting on his part to instruct his children, if he admonish and advice them when they do amiss, and they continue still to afflict his heart, either by neglecting that employment in which he hath placed them, or wasting his estate in riotous and licentious courses: is the poor Father left without further remedy, then what may be had upon complaint from the Civil Magistrate? No, by no means. The Father at the first by the law of Nations, had potestatem vitae & necis 
(e) Mincing. in Instit. l. 1. tit. 9 , the power of life and death over all their children. But after the receiving of the Christian faith, the law was altered in that case by the following Emperors. And now as the Civilians tell us, Parentibus solummodo relinquitur honesta emendatio, & maximis ex causis exhaeredatio, i. e. The father's power consisteth most especially in these points, to punish and chastise them for their smaller faults, and disinherit them in time, if they prove incorrigible. Which power as it was used by jacob on his eldest son Reuben 
(f) Gen. 49.4. , because he had defiled his old father's bed: so hath it since been ordinary in the practice of all times and ages; though perhaps more to be commended where it may not, then where it may possibly be spared.  
Such also is the care, and consequently such the power of our Heavenly Father. For who but he taught Abel how to order Sheep 
(g) Gen. 4.2. , and Cain to till the ground, or to be an husbandman; jubal to play on instruments 
(h) Gen. 4.21, 22. , and Tubalcain to work in iron? who but he called forth joshua to fight his battles; and Aaron and his sons to serve at the holy Altar 
(k) Levit. 8.2. ? And for the bringing of them up in the fear of GOD, he hath revealed himself so far to the Turks and Pagans, and in the former times to the ancient Gentiles, (which are his children only by the right of Creation) that by the things which he hath made, they may perceive both his eternal power and Godhead 
(l) Rom. 1.20. . Though he permitted them for a while to walk in their own ways, and so fulfil their several lusts, yet left he not himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or without a witness 
(m) Act. 14.16, 17. , in that he showed his works unto them, and filled their hearts with food and gladness. Nay, that which may be known of God, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as St. Paul calleth it, is manifest in them 
(n) Prov. 1.20. : for the invisible things of God, saith the same Apostle, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen: that is, as Augustine doth expound it, per visibilia Creaturae pervenisse eos ad intelligent am invisiblis Creatoris 
(o) August. de Spir. & lit. c. 12. , by studying on the Book of Nature, they came to understand the nature of GOD. For further proof whereof, if more proof be necessary, we need but have recourse to the former Chapter; where we did prove this point, that there was a God, and that he is eternal and incomprehensible, of infinite both power and wisdom. Nor did GOD leave them so in this general knowledge, but he revealed so much of his will unto them, as is included or expressed in the law of Nature. The Gentiles (saith St. Paul) which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, which showeth the work of the law written in their hearts; their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts excusing or accusing one another 
(p) Rom. 2.14. . By means whereof, such of them as were careful to conform their lives unto that law, and put not out that light which did shine within them; attained unto an eminent height in all moral virtues. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(g) Greg. Nazian. Orat. 31. , as it is in Naziazen. Which moral piety of theirs, if not directed to the glory of GOD, as it ought to be, but either to advance their projects, or else to gain opinion and be seen of men; may perhaps mitigate their torments, but not advance them to the glories of eternal life. Nec vitae aeiernae veros acquirere fructus, De falsa virtute potest 
(r) Prosp. Carm. de ingrat. , as Prosper hath it. Not that those actions in themselves were not good and commendable, and might deserve some more than ordinary blessings at the hands of GOD: but that those men being so far instructed and illuminated, they desisted there; holding the truth, (as St. Paul telleth us) in unrighteousness 
(s) Rom. 1.18, 20. , and so became without excuse. But of this more hereafter in another place. And if the Lord hath been so gracious to the ancient Gentiles, and still is to the Turks and Pagans of the present ages; which are his children only by the right of Creation; no question but he doth instruct whom he hath adopted, after a more peculiar manner. He showed his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his Ordinances unto Israel 
(t) Psa. 147.19. , saith the Prophet David of the jews. And as for us which have the happiness to live under the Gospel, the Lord himself hath said by the Prophet jeremy, that he would write his law in their hearts, and put it in our inward parts 
(u) Jer. 31.33. , and by another of his Prophets, that our sons and daughters should prophesy 
(x) Joel 2.28. , and that we should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or taught of God. If after so much care on the part of God, if after all this done by our Heavenly Father, we still continue ignorant of his will, or shut our eyes against that light which doth shine upon us, and stop our ears against the voice of the Charmer, charm he never so sweetly: no wonder if he draw his sword, and either cut us off by a temporal death, or publicly expose us unto shame and misery. For sure it cannot be denied, but that the Lord our heavenly Father hath potestatem vitae & necis, the power of life and death over all his children. The Lord hath power of life and death, (as the wise man hath it) he leadeth to the gates of Hell, and brings back again, Wisd. 16.13. But this a severity which God reserves unto the last, as the utmost remedy, inflicting in the mean time moderate chastisements on his wilful children, in hope by that means to reclaim them. Which if they do not take effect, he than proceeds unto the woeful sentence of disinheritance, expungeth them out of the Catalogue of his Elect, razeth their names out of the sacred Book of life, and leaves them no inheritance in the house of Jesse, or any portion at all in the son of David. So excellently true is that of Lactantius, Deus ut erga bonos indulgentissimus Pater, ita adversus improbos justissimus judex. God, saith he, as he is a loving and indulgent Father towards his good and godly children; so towards those who are past hope of reformation, he will become as terrible and severe a judge; so he Institut. tut. l. 1. cap. 1.  
And certainly it doth concern us in an high degree, to keep the love and good opinion of our heavenly Father; who is not only able to chastise us with such light corrections as are inflicted on us by our earthly Parents; but to arm all the hosts of Heaven, and all the creatures of the Earth against us, as once he did against Pharaoh and the land of Egypt. GOD is not here represented to us by the name of a Father only, but by the name of a Father Almighty. The title of Omnipotent makes a different case; and may be our Remembrancer upon all occasions, to keep us from incurring his just displeasure, and drawing down his vengeance on our guilty heads. This is that infinity or infiniteness of power, which before I spoke of, and is so proper unto God, that it is not to be communicated unto any creature, no not unto the man CHRIST JESUS. The Roman Emperors indeed in the times of their greatest flourish did take unto themselves the style of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; whereby they gave the world to understand that they were absolute and independent, not tied to the observance of any laws, or bound by the Decrees of Senate: but that of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Omnipotent, was never challenged by the proudest, nor given unto them by the grossest of their many Parasites. Now GOD is said to be Almighty, because that he is able to do, and doth upon occasion also, whatsoever pleaseth him both in Heaven and Earth, as the Psalmist hath it 
(a) Psal. 135.6. : For with God nothing is impossible, saith the holy Angel 
(b) Luk. 1.37. . And though some things may seem impossible in the eyes of men, yet apud Deum omnia sunt possibilia 
(c) Mat. 19.26. , all things are possible to God, saith CHRIST our Saviour: yet still observe the words of David before mentioned, which is the Rule or Standard, if I may so call it, by which not only possibility and impossibility, but even Omnipotency itself is to be measured: and David saith not of the Lord that he can do all things, but whatsoever pleaseth him, be it what it will. For therefore God the Father is said to be Almighty or Omnipotent, not that he can do every thing whatsoever it be, and will do all things that he can: but because he can do all things that he plaaseth, all that can be done. Because he can do all things, whatsoever he pleaseth. For as S. Augustine well observeth, nec ob aliud vocatur Omnipotens, nisi quia quicquid vult potest 
(d) August. in Enchirid. c. 96. , Because he can do all things which can be done. For some things are not denied to be impossible even to God himself; as namely such as do imply a contradiction: and so the dictate of Aquinas is exceeding true, Deus omnia potest quae contradictionem non implicant 
(e) Aquin. 1. qu. 25. Art. 3.4. . Nor can he do such things as may argue him to be capable of any defect, as namely to be unjust, to lie, to be confined to place, or to change his being: according to another rule of the same Aquinas, i. e. Omnipotentia excludit defectus omnes qui sunt impotentia, ceu posse mentiri, mori, peccare, etc. The reasons are, first because those things in themselves would make him liable to impotency, wants, and weakness, and utterly deprive him of the title of a Father Almighty. Nam si haec ei acciderent non esset Omnipotens 
(f) August. de Civit. dei. l. 5. c. 10. , as most excellently it is said by Augustine. Secondly, actions of that nature, are in themselves so contrary to the nature of God, that were they once admitted in him, he must instantly renounce himself, and forfeit, as it were, his Deity. Unto which purpose that of Origen serves exceeding fitly. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. 
(g) Orig. adv. Cel. Sum. l. 3. . God (saith he) can do every thing whatsoever it be, by doing which he may continue as he is, just, true, and gracious. For as (saith he) that which is sweet by nature, cannot make any thing unpleasant; and that which was created to illuminate, cannot be possibly employed as an help to darkness: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. so neither is it possible that God being just and wise by nature, should either deal unjustly, or do any thing with indiscretion. Upon these reasons and authorities, the Schoolmen have divided the power of God into actual and absolute. God doing by his actual power whatsoever he pleaseth, and by his absolute power all things that are possible. But that he should do any thing to the dishonour of the Godhead, is not possible: and therefore as he will not do it, so we may safely say he cannot. Other the subtleties of the Schools touching this particular, which are more likely to entangle the wits of men, then reform their judgements; I have no list to intermingle with my present discourse.  
Leaving them therefore to the sweet contentment of their own curiosities, we rather will consider the Omnipotence of our Heavenly Father, in the effects it hath produced for the good of his children, then in those needless speculations which are raised about it. And these we shall behold, at the present time, either in reference to his suspension of the works of Nature; or his strange turning of the hearts and intents of men, quite contrary to what they had before resolved on; or in those many and most miraculous deliverances, which he hath shown unto his people in their great extremities. Of the first sort are those which are related in the Book of God, as namely, the standing still of the Sun in the Valley of Aialon, that joshua might have the more time to destroy his enemies 
(h) Josh. 10.12, 13.  and the making of it to go back ten degrees on the Dial of Ahaz, for an assurance unto Hezekiah, that the Lord would heal him 
(i) 2 King. 20.11. ; his interdicting of the Red-sea that it should not flow, but stand divided like a wall on both sides of Israel, till they were gone through it 
(k) Exod. 14.22. ; and causing Irenius which is a gross and heavy body to swim upon the top of the water, at the prayer of Elisha 
(l) 2 King. 6.5. ; His suspending of the nature of fire, that it should not burn, nor sing so much as the clothes of the three Hebrew Salamanders, when they were cast fast bound into the burning fiery furnace 
(m) Dan. 3.22. & 27. ; and making the same fire to move out of his course, when it laid hold on those who were to execute the great tyrants commands: His shutting the mouths of the hungry Lions, and bringing his servant Daniel back in safety from that dreadful Den 
(n) Id. c. 6.22. ; and making the Ravens which by nature are birds of prey, to be the Caterers of Elijah to bring him bread in the morning, and bread and flesh in the evening 
(o) 1 King. 17.6. : His making a night of three hours in the midst of day, when our Saviour was upon the Cross 
(p) Mat. 27.45. & 52.53. ; and causing that the Graves did give up their dead, to wait upon our Saviour at his Resurrection. How many more instances of this kind might be here presented, not only out of Sacred, but Ecclesiastical and Civil Histories, were not these few sufficient to evince this truth, that God the Father Almighty and the God of nature, by his Omipotence or Almighty power, is able to suspend the whole course of nature, when soever he shall think it to be most conducible either to his own glory, or the good of his people? And this Omnipotence of his, is shown as evidently in those manifold and most miraculous deliverances of his faithful, as well by extraordinary means and miracles, which are above the course of nature; as by those which do suspend that course, and are quite against it. Of this sort was the reprieving of Isaac, when all hope was hopeless, holding back Abraham's hand by the voice of an Angel 
(q) Gen. 22.11.12. ; and showing so many miracles in the land of Egypt, for the redemption of the seed of that Isaac from the house of bondage 
(r) Exod. ch. 7, 8. etc. : His blowing down of the walls of jericho by the sound of Rams-horns 
(s) Josh. 6.20.10, & 11. , and killing more with hailstones in the battle of Gideon, than all the men of Israel had slain with the sword. Of this sort was the casting of a mist as it were on the eyes of the Moabites, that they mistook the Sunshine on the water for streams of blood; which made them run disorderly into the camp of the Israelites, where they were sharply entertained to their full discomfiture 
(t) 2 King. 3.20 etc. : His making Benhadad and the dreadful Army of the Syrians, to hear the noise of horses, and the noise of chariots, and thereby putting them to flight in such soul disorder, that they left their Tents, and victuals to the starved Samaritans 
(u) 2 King. 7: 6, 7, & 19.35. ; His smiting of an hundred threescore and five thousand fight men in the Camp of the Assyrians, by the sword of an Angel, and thereby freeing Hezekiah from the threats of Sennacherib; and finally by delivering his Infant-Church out of the tyranny of persecution, by giving Herod 
(x) Act. 12. , whilst yet living, a prey to worms. Are not all these and infinite others of this kind, not only the pregnant testimonies of his love and goodness, but also the eternal monuments and everlasting characters of his Omnipotence?  
But that which most sets forth this great power of GOD, is in my mind, his turning of the hearts and intents of men, quite contrary to that which they had formerly resolved on, at often as he thinks that way fittest for the preservation of his servants. Thus did he turn the heart of Laban, who pursued after jacob with no good intention, that he could not speak to him one displeasing word 
(y) Gen. 31.24 etc. 33. v. 4. : and did so turn the heart of Esau, who had vowed his death; that instead of putting him to the sword, having power to do it, he fell on jacob's neck, and kissed him, and they wept together. Thus did he so incline the hearts of the Egyptians towards the seed of the same jacob, of whom they did esteem no otherwise then of a perpetual race of Bondmen; that they did not only let them depart in peace, but furnished them with jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, and ornaments 
(z) Exod. 12.35.  of several sorts to set out their sacrifices: and did so overrule both the heart and tongue of the Prophet Balaam, that being hired to curse the whole house of Israel, he could not choose but bless them all at once together 
(a) Numb. ch. 23. & 24. . And this I take to be a greater manifestation of God's Omnipotence, than any contra-natural, or supernatural kind of means; by which he hath preserved his people from the hands of their enemies: the Heart of man being a bottomeless pit of deceit and villainy, and mischievous imaginations, and invincible malice. But of all miracles of Omnipotence mentioned in the Scripture, there is not in my judgement any one more eminent, then that which he wrought upon the children of Ammon and Moab, and those of Mount Seir, when they joined all their Forces together against jehosaphat the good King of judah 
(b) 2 Chr. 20.1. . For by a strange misprision which God sent amongst them, the children of Ammon and Moab fell upon the inhabitants of Mount Seir, and slew them and destroyed them utterly; and when they had made an end of the Inhabitants of Seir, every one to destroy another 
(c) Ibid. v. 23. . Never so great a slaughter made, never so signal a deliverance given to the people of God by the swords of their Enemies; even by the swords of those who had joined together, to root out their memorial from the face of the earth. If now we should descend from Scriptures to Ecclesiastical History, shall we not find the great power of God exemplified as visibly in the protection and defence of the Christian Church: and that not only in the miraculous propagation and increase thereof, and bringing to calamitous ends her greatest enemies; but working on the hearts of the sharpest Persecutors, to intermit their rage, and lay down their fury? Witness the Edict of Trajan, the Author of the third Persecution, De Christianis non inquirendis 
(d) Euseb. Eccles. hist. l. 3.30. , that no such Inquisition should be made against them as in former times; that of the Emperor Adrian, Ne Christianus indicta causa puniatur 
(e) Id. l. 4.9. , that no Christian should from thenceforth be punished without some crime laid to his charge, in which he had offended against the Laws. Antonine adding unto this ut delator poenae subjaceat, that the Promoter should be liable to punishment 
(f) Id. l. 4 13. , if he proved it not. The like of Marcus as great a Persecuter at the first as any which had been before him, who did not only stay the fury of the Executioners, but mortem iis minabatur qui Christianos accusabant 
(g) Id. l. 5.5. , but threatened death to the accusers. Nor stayed God here, but for the further manifestation of his mighty power in ruling and overruling the hearts of men, he wrought so wonderfully and Omnipotently on the hearts of some of their greatest enemies, that from their bitter and most violent Persecutors they became their Patrons. Witness the Mandate or edict of the Emperor Galienus, not only for the intermitting of the persecution which Valerianus his Father had raised against them, but authorising the Prelates and other Ministers 
(h) Id. l. 7.12. , Vt cuncta munia pro consuetudine obirent, to perform all the sacred Offices which belonged unto them. Finally, witness the like Edict of Maximinus, one of the chief Instruments of Diocletians butcheries, and a great slaughterman himself when he came to the Empire: commanding that the Christians should be left to their own Religion▪ and not compelled as formerly under pain of death to offer sacrifice to Idols, but won if possibly it might be, blanditiis & adhortationibus 
(i) Id. l. 9.9. , by the fairest means, and the best persuasions that the wit of man could lay before them. These things as they were marvellous in the eyes of all men, so marvellous that they could not choose but see and say, A Domino haec facta, that they were all of them of the Lords own doing: so was it as easy to be seen that they were the effects of his Omnipotence, proceeding from the love and power of a Father Almighty.    

ARTICLE II. Of the Second ARTICLE OF THE CREED Ascribed unto St. JOHN. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. i e. Creatorem Coeli et Terrae. i e. Maker of Heaven and Earth.  

CHAP. IU. Of the Creation of the World and the parts thereof: that it was made at first by God's mighty power, and since continually preserved by his infinite Providence.  
WITH very great fitness doth the Article of the World's Creation, come next the Attribute of Almighty; as being that act which might alone entitle GOD unto Omnipotence, were there none besides. For what but an Omnipotent power could out of no preaexistent matter create that goodly edifice of Heaven and Earth, and all things in the same contained, which every natural man beholdeth with such admiration, that possibly he cannot choose but say with the royal Psalmist, The Heavens declare the glory of God, and the Earth showeth his handy work 
(a) Psal. 19.1. ? A work so full of wonder to the ancient Gentiles, that some of them made the world a God; Vis illum (i. e. Deum) mundum vocare, non falleris, as it is in Seneca 
(b) Senec. in quaest. Natural. : others more rationally conceiving GOD to be the soul of the World, as giving animation or being to it. And though they erred as well in making the World a God, as making GOD to be the Soul of the World: yet they might very well have said as one since hath done, that the World is nothing else but God unfolded and manifested in the Creature. Nil aliud Mundus universus quam Deus explicatus, as Cusanus hath it. And certainly the special motions which did induce GOD unto this great work, were a desire and purpose to express his power, to exercise his providence, and declare his goodness. For though GOD needed not to have made the World in regard of himself, for the World we know was made in the beginning of time, but GOD is infinite and eternal before all beginnings: yet it seemed good to him to create it at last, as a thing most conducible to his praise and glory. Some measuring the God of Heaven by their own affections, and finding nothing so agreeable to their own dispositions, as to be in company, conceive that God being at last weary of his own solitude did create the World, that he might have the company of the Angels in Heaven, and make a start into the Earth when he saw occasion, to recreate himself with the sons of Men. Quae beata esse solitudo queat? What happiness, said Hortensius, can be in solitude? 
(c) Lactan. l. 1. c. 7.  To which Lactantius not being furnished with a better, doth return this answer, that GOD cannot be said to be alone, Habet enim Ministros quos vocamus nuncios, as having the society of the holy Angels. But then Lactantius must suppose that the Angels have been coeternal with GOD himself, (which were to make all Gods, and no God at all) or else his Answer is no answer as to that Objection. How much more rightly might we have thus replied unto them, that the supreme contentment possible to Almighty God, is by reflecting on himself, and in himself contemplating his own infinite glories: which being co-aevall with himself, even from all eternity, he needed no no more company before the World was made than he hath done since. Lactantius being a man of a very great reading (though indeed a better Humanitian then Divine) could not but know those sweet delights which a man habited in learning takes in contemplation; and the society which he hath of his own dear thoughts, though never so much removed from the sight of men. And if the wise Gentile could affirm so sadly, nunquam minus solum esse quam cum solus esset, that he was never less alone than when he was by himself: what need can any rational man suppose in Almighty God, of having more company than himself in? If this suffice not for an answer to that needless demand, What God did before he made the World, 
(d) Aug. Confess l. 11. c. 12.  let him take that of Augustine on the like occasion: who being troubbled with this curious and impertinent question, is said to have returned this answer, Curiosis fabricare inferos, that he made Hell for all such troublesome and idle Questionists.  
But it pleased God at last, when it seemed best unto his infinite and eternal wisdom, to create the World, and all things visible and invisible in the same contained. A point so clear and evident in the Book of God, that he must needs reject the Scripture who makes question of it. And as the Scripture tells us that God made the World; so do they also tell us this, that because he made the World, he is therefore God. For thus saith David in the Psalms, The Lord is great and very greatly to be praised, he is to be feared above all Gods. As for the Gods of the Heathen they are but Idols, but it is the Lord which made the Heavens 
(e) Psal. 96.5. . Where plainly the strength of David's argument to prove the Lord to be God, doth consist in this, because it was he only, not the gods of the Heathen, which created the World. The like we also find in the Prophet jeremy, The Lord, saith he, is the true God, he is the living God and an everlasting King, and the Nations shall not be able to abide his indignation. Thus shall ye say unto them, The Gods that have not made the Heavens and the Earth, even they shall perish from the Earth, and from under these Heavens 
(f) Jer. 10.10, 11. . He hath made the Earth by his power, and established the World by his wisdom, and hath stretched out the Heavens by his discretion. In which two verses of the Prophet we have proof sufficient, first that▪ God made the World by his power and wisdom; and secondly that this making of the World by his power and wisdom, doth difference or distinguish him from the gods of the Heathen, of whom it is affirmed expressly, that they were so far from being able to make Heaven and Earth, that they should perish from the Earth and from under Heaven. But what need Scripture be produced to assert that truth, which is so backed by the authority of the Learned Gentiles? whose understandings were so fully convinced by the inspection of the Book of nature, especially by that part of it which did acquaint them with the nature of the Heavenly Bodies, that they concluded to themselves without further evidence, that the Author of this great Book was the only God; and that he only was that great invisible power, which did deserve that Sovereign title. And this Pythagoras, one of the first founders of philosopy amongst the Grecians, who in all probability had never seen the works of Moses, as Plato and those that followed after are supposed to have done, doth most significantly aver in these following verses, which are preserved in justin Martyr 
(g) Iust. Mart. de Monarch. dei. .  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
Which may be thus paraphased in our English tongue: 
He that will say, I am a Power divine,  
A God, besides that one; let him first make  
A world like this, and say that this is mine,  
Before he to himself that title take.   
For the next point, that God the Father Almighty did create the World, it is a truth so clear and evident in the Book of God, that he must needs reject the Scripture who makes question of it: it being not only told us in the holy Scriptures that God made the World, but also when he made it, and upon what reasons, with all the other circumstances which concern the same. The very first words of God's book, if we look no further, are in themselves sufficient to confirm this point. In the beginning (saith the Text) God created the Heaven and the Earth 
(h) Gen. 1.1. . As Moses, so the royal Psalmist, He laid the foundations of the Earth, and covered it with the deep as it were with a garment, and spreadeth out the Heavens like a curtain 
(i) Psal. 104.5, 6, 2. . He made Heaven and Earth, the Sea and all that therein is 
(k) Psal. 146.5. . And so the whole College of the Apostles when they were joined together in their prayers to God, Lord (said they) thou art God which made Heaven and Earth, the Sea and all that in them is 
(l) Act. 4.24. . Made it, but how? not with his hands assuredly, there is no such matter. The whole World though it be an house, and the house of God, (cum Deo totus mundus sit und domus 
(m) Minut. Fel. , said the Christian Orator) yet it is properly to be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, an house not made with hands. How then? He made it only by his word. Dixit et facta sunt, He spoke the word and they were made, saith the sweet finger of Israel 
(n) Psal. 33.9. . There went no greater pains to the World's creation, than a Dixit Deus 
(o) Gen. 1.3, 6, 9, etc. . And this not only said by Moses, but by David too, Verbo Domini coeli firmatī sunt, et spiritu oris ejus omnis virtus eorum; i. e. By the word of the Lord were the Heavens made, and all the hosts of them by the breath of his mouth 
(p) Psal. 33.6. . In which it is to be observed, that though the creation of the World be generally ascribed unto God the Father, yet both the Son and the holy Ghost had their parts therein. Verbo Domini, by the word of the Lord were the Heavens made, saith the Prophet David. In the beginning was the Word 
(q) Joh. 1.1, 3. . All things were made by him, and without him was nothing made: saith St. john the Apostle. The Spirit of God moved upon the waters, saith Moses in the Book of the Law 
(r) Gen. 1.2. ; and Spiritu oris ejus, by breath of his mouth were all the hosts of Heaven created, saith David in the book of Psalms. Made by his word, but yet not made together in one instant of time; to teach us men deliberation in our words and actions, and to set forth unto us both his power and wisdom. His power he manifested in the Method of the worlds create on, in that he did produce what effects he pleased without the help of natural causes, in giving light unto the World before he had created the Sun and Moon, making the earth fruitful, and to bring forth plants, without the motion or influence of the Heavenly bodies. And for his wisdom he expressed in as high a degree, in that he did not create the Beasts of the field, before he had provided them of fodder, and sufficient herbage; nor made man after his own image, before he had finished his whole work, filled his house, and furnished it with all things necessary both for life and pleasures.  
Some time than God thought fit to take for perfecting the great work of the World's creation; six days in all, of which the first did lay the foundation, the rest raised the building. The foundation of it, I conceive to be that unformed matter, out of which all things were extracted in the other five days: which Moses first calleth the Heaven and the Earth 
(s) Gen. 1.1, 2. , because they were so in potentia; but after telleth us more explicitly, that that which he called Earth, was inanis et vacua, without form, and void; and that which he called Heaven, was but an overcast of darkness, or tenebrae super faciem Abyssi, as the Vulgar reads it. Of which Chaos or confused Mass we thus read in Ovid 
(t) Ovid. Metam. 1. , who questionless had herein consulted with the works of Moses, before his time communicated to the learned Gentiles.  
Ante mare, et terras, et quod tegit omnia Coelum,  
Vnus erat toto naturae vultus in orbe,  
Quem dixere Chaos; rudis indigestaque moles,  
Nec quicquam nisi pondus iners, congestaque eodem  
Non bene junctarum discordia semina rerum, etc.  
Which I shall English from Geo. Sandys with some little change.  
Before the Earth, the Sea, or Heaven were framed  
One face had nature which they Chaos named;  
An undigested lump, a barren load  
Where jarring seeds of things ill-joyned abode.  
No Sun as yet with light the World adorns,  
Nor new Moon had repaired her waning horns.  
Nor hung the self-poised Earth in thin Air placed,  
Nor had the Ocean the vast shores embraced.  
Earth, Sea, and Air, all mixed; the Earth unstable,  
The Air was dark; the Sea un-navigable.  
No certain form to any one assigned,  
This that resist's. For in one body joined  
The cold and hot, the dry and humid fight,  
The soft and hard, the heavy with the light.  
Out of this Chaos or first matter did GOD raise the World according to those several parts and lineaments which we see it in: not as out of any pre-existent matter which was made before, and had not GOD for the Author or Maker of it; but as the first preparatory matter which himself had made, including in the same potentially both the form and matter of the whole Creation, except the soul of man only which he breathed into him after he had moulded up his body out of the dust of the earth. And therefore it is truly said that GOD made all things out of nothing: not out of nothing as the matter out of which it was made, for than that nothing must be something: but as the terminus a quo, in giving them a real and corporeal being, which before they had not, and did then first begin to have, by the mere efficacy and virtue of his powerful world. And though it be a maxim in the Schools of Philosophy, Ex nihil● nil fit, that nothing can be made of nothing, that every thing which hath a being doth require some matter which must be pre-existent to it: yet this must either be condemned for erroneous doctrine in the chair of Divinity; or else be limited and restrained, as indeed it may (considering from whence it came) to visible and natural agents, which cannot go beyond the sphere of their own activity. Invisible and supernatural agents are not tied to rules, no not in the production of the works of nature; though nature constituted and established in a certain course, work every thing by time and measure in a certain rule.  
Now as the World was made of nothing; that is to say, without any uncreated or precedent matter, which may be possibly conceived to have been coexistent with the Godhead itself, and thereby gained a being or existence which before it had not: so had it a beginning too, that is to say, a time in which it first did begin to be, what before it was not. This Moses calleth principium, a beginning simple: In principio creavit Deus Coelum et Terram 
(u) Gen. 1.1. , In the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth: which is all one as if he had said, the Heaven and the Earth had a beginning, and that this unformed Mass of Chaos, was the beginning, or first draught of them, the first in order of time, because made before them, not in the way of causality as the cause thereof. Coelum et Terra in principio; i. e. ante omnia facta sunt, as Simon Pottius hath observed in his notes or Scholies on St. john's Gospel. So that whether we do expound those words that the Heaven and Earth had a beginning, or that Moses by those words did mean that out of that which he calleth the Heaven and the Earth as out of the beginning or first matter all things were created, it comes all to one: because it is acknowledged that that first matter was created by God, and therefore of necessity was to have a beginning. Nor doth the Scripture only tell us that the World had a beginning, but by the help of Scripture and the works of some Learned men, we are able to point out the time when it did begin, or to compute how many years it is precisely from the first beginning, without any notable difference in the Calculation. For though it be most truly said, Citius inter Horologia quam Chronologia, that clocks may sooner be agreed then Chronologers; yet most Chronologers in this point come so near one another, that the difference is scarce observable. From the beginning of the World to the birth of Christ, in the account of Beroaldus, are 3928. years; 3945. in the computation of the Genevians; 3960. in the esteem of Luther; and 3963. in the calculation of Melanchthon: between whom and Beroaldus, being the least and the greatest, there is but 35. years' difference; which in so long a tract of time can be no great matter. Now if unto the calculation made by Beroaldus, which I conceive to be the truest, we add 1646. since the birth of CHRIST; the total of the time since the World's Creation will be 5576. years, neither more nor less. And to this truth that the World had a beginning whensoever it was, and was not of eternal being or a self-existency, most of the old Philosophers did consent unanimously; guided thereto by this impossibility in nature, that any visible work either natural or artificial, should either give itself a being, or have that being which it hath from no cause precedent. For from that principle, Tully argueth very rightly, that as a man coming into a goodly house in which he found nothing but rats and mice, could not conceive that either the house had built itself, or had no other maker but those rats and mice which were nested in it: so neither can it be imagined, that either this World should be eternal, of a self-existency, or was composed by any natural agent of what power soever 
(x) Cicero de Natura Deor. . And this is that which is more briefly and expressly said by St. Paul to the Hebrews, viz. That every house is built by some man, but he that built all things is God 
(y) Heb. 3.4. . 'tis true that Aristotle being a great enquirer into the works of nature, conceived the World to be eternal; and yet not always constant unto that opinion. But than it is as true withal, that there was something else which inclined him to it, than his mere admiration of the works of nature. Democritus and some others of the old Philosophers had been of opinion, that the World was made in the first beginnings fortuitis atomorum concur ●ionibus, by the accidental union or communion of several parcels, of which the Universe consisted; that man himself was only voluntaria Elementorum concretio 
(z) Minut. Fel. , a voluntary mixture of all the Elements into which he finally was resolved. To which absurd opinion (as indeed it was) though it then found a general embracement amongst most Philosophers, when Aristotle knew not how to submit his most exquisite judgement; and yet was destitute of such further light, as might more fully have instructed him in the true Original; he rather chose to grant the world to be eternal, then to be made of such ridiculous and unsound, though eternal Atoms. Et maluit pulchram han● Mundi faciem ab aeterno esse, 
(a) Valles. de sacr. Phil. p. 16.  quam aliquando ex aeterna deformitate emersisse; as Vallesius pleads in his behalf; and I thank him for it, who am (I must confess) a great friend of Aristotle's; the Praecursor (as some call him) of our Saviour CHRIST in naturalibus, as John Baptist was in divinis.  
And now I am thus fallen on these old Philosophers, I shall produce the testimonies of some chiefs among them for proof of this, that the Creation of the World was an effect of the most infinite power of Almighty God: the knowledge whereof in such particular terms as by them delivered, was first communicated to the Grecians by the wise men of Egypt, who questionless had learned it of the Hebrews when they lived among them. And first Mercu●ius Trismegistus, not only doth affirm that God made the World, but that he made it by his word; that he did only say, Existat Sol, let the Sun arise, and presently the Sun shined on the face of the earth: and that by the power and efficacy of the same Word, the Elements were distinguished, the Heavens beautified with stars, the Earth adorned with herbs and plants of each several sort; as his words are cited by St. Cyrill 
(b) Cyr. contra julian. l. 2. . Thales one of the wise men of Greece, who had spent some part of his time in Egypt, and was the first qui de Coelestibus disputavit, who brought the knowledge of divine matters amongst his Countrymen, making the Element of water to be the first matter as it were whence all things proceeded: Deum autem eam mentem quae ex aqua cuncta formaverit, and that God was that infinite mind or understanding, which out of that created all things 
(c) Minut. Fel. in Octavio. . In which he comes so near the next laid down by Moses, that Minutius reckoneth him to have affirmed the same thing though in different words. Vides Philosophi principalis opinionem nobiscum penitus consonare. Plato doth seem to speak so doub●ingly in this point, that many did conceive that he inclined to the opinion of the World's eternity. But besides that this is one of the great controversies betwixt him and Aristotle; Plutarch who was well versed in his works and writings, doth absolutely free him from that imputation: not only saying of those who did so conclude, that they did torquere verba ejus, extend his words upon the Rack, to make them speak that which he never meant 
(d) Plutarch. de dogmat. Philos. ; but positively affirming that in his Book inscribed Timaeus, he treated of the World's Creation, as the chief scope and subject of that discourse. For Aristotle next, though in his books of Physics or natural Philosophy, he labour to maintain the World's Eternity, upon the grounds before delivered: yet in his Metaphysics, where he speaks of abstracted notions, and travailed in the search of materials, he doth express himself in another manner. Qui▪ Deum, seu mentem, causam & autorem dixit, etc. He (saith that excellent Philosopher) who doth affirm that God is the cause and Author not only of all living creatures, but even of nature itself, and of the universal World and the course thereof, speaks like a sober-minded man; they which say otherwise being rash unadvised persons 
(e) Arist. Met. . And this he doth express more clearly in his tract inscribed De Mirabilibus, if at the least that tract be his, where he declareth that naturally the Sea both did and would overwhelm the whole face of the Earth, because higher than it in situation; but that it is restrained by the power and command of GOD, to the intent the Earth might serve the better for the use of men, and other living creatures which inhabit on it 
(f) Id. lib. de Mirabilibus. . What he hath said of God in his book De Mundo, where he calleth him the Father both of Gods and Men, hath been shown before: Theophrastus a great follower of Aristotle, not only doth maintain that the World was created by God, but that he was ex nihilo, without any pre-existing or precedent matter 
(g) Theop. lib. de Saporibus. . And Galen that great Doctor in Physic▪ who had no more religion in him then what might serve for a Physician and an Heathen too, having surveyed and as it were dissected all the parts of the World, concludes at last, that it was very fit both for him and all men Canticum comp●nere in Creatoris nostri laudem, to make an Hymn in honour of their great Creator; and therein to express his wisdom, his great power and goodness.  
The Latins as they borrowed their Philosophy from the learned Greeks, so did they take up such opinions as they found most prevalent amongst them; though otherwise divided into several Sects as the Grecians were. Varro as the most ancient, so the most learned of the Romans, (as St. Augustine out of Cicero 
(h) August. de Civit. dei. l. 6.2.  doth affirm he was) reckoneth the first Period or Aera, at which he doth begin all his computations, from the creation of the World: and makes it the opinion both of Zeno and the Stoics generally, that the World had a beginning, and should have an end. Cicero though an Academic, and consequently a Sceptic in all points of controversy, doth yet conclude, Deum condidisse et ornasse hominem, mundum etiam, mare, terram divino nutui parere; that GOD made man, and ●urnished him with those endowments which he still enjoyeth 
(i) Tull. de nature. Deorum. l. 2. ; and that the World, the Sea and Earth are obedient unto his command. (Remember what was said before of the Rats and Mice, and then no question need be made what he thought herein.) For Seneca as he was a Stoic, so there is little doubt but that he held those Tenets which Varro doth ascribe to the Stoics generally. But yet to take him in our way, we shall hear him saying, that God created all the World, yea and Man himself 
(k) Senec. de vit. beata. l. 2. c. 31.32. . And of this truth he was so certain, that he thought it loss of time to inquire any further after the beginnings of things, who made them and did first extract them out of the common mass or Chaos where before they lay. Quid quae●am (saith he) quae sint initia universorum, quis rerum formator, qui omnia in uno mersa et materia inerti convoluta dis●reverit 
(l) Id. quaest. natural. l. 1. ? Macrobius speaks more plainly yet, although he somewhat failed in his computation, affirming that the World must be lately made, Cujus cognitio bis mille annos non excedat 
(m) Macrob. Saturnal. l. 1. , considering that there was no monument or record thereof which could entitle it to the age of two thousand years. The like may be affirmed of the Poets, who do ascribe the glory of the World's Creation unto God alone; Ovid in plain significant terms, Sine ulla nominis dissimulatione, as Lactantius hath it 
(n) Lact. l. 1.5. , without boggling or scrupling at the name of God; Virgil more covertly under the names of men's and Spiritus, under the which names the old Philosophers used to mask him. For Ovid having before described the general Chaos, then adds 
(o) Ovid Men. l. 1. , 
Hanc Deus et melior litem natura diremit,  
Nam Coelo terras, et terris abscidit undas.   
That is to say; 
But God, the better nature, this decides,  
Who Earth from Heaven, the Sea from Earth divides.  And shortly after speaking of the Creation of Man, he gives God these most honourable titles, the Maker of all things, the Author of a better World; or Ille opifex rerum, mundi melioris origo, in his proper language. Virgil although he speaks more covertly, as before was said, yet he ascribeth that to his men's or Spiritus, which Ovid in more plain terms doth assign to God; and so co●es somewhat near the truth, Non long fuit a veritate, as Lactantius noteth 
(p) Lact. l. 1.5. . For in his Aeneads thus he tells us.  
Principio Coelum et Terras, camposque liquentes,  
Lucentemque globum Lunae, Titaniaque Astra,  
Spiritus intus alit, totamque infusa per artus  
Mens agitat molem, et magno se ●orpore miscet 
(q) Virg. Aen. l. 6. .  
Which may be Englished thus in brief; 
Heaven, Earth, and Seas, the Sun and Moons bright sphere,  
In the beginning by some Spirit were  
Divinely cherished; which diffused through all,  
Did like the Soul quicken this massy Ball.   
In which we have not only intimated the powerful influence of the Spirit, but the words In principio, which are used by Moses.  
But to return again to the Word of God; we find not only there that God made the World, and that he made it in such time as himself best pleased; but also the course and method which he used in so great a work. A work which took up six whole days as before was said; God taking a delight as it were in his own productions, and giving them the commendation of good, as they were created; or pretermitting that commendation, as sometimes he did, when any thing was wanting unto that perfection which was after added. For in the work of the second day, wherein God did divide the waters above the firmament, from those which were disposed beneath it; we do not find this approbation, et vidit Deus quod esset bonum: because that did not bring the waters to that use and perfection which after they received when they were separated from the Earth, and gathered together into one body which he called the Sea. And this consideration is alone sufficient to confute a strange conceit of some late Divines. Who on pretence of some authority out of Augustine's works, have told us that all things were created at once, by the power of God, and that not only in one day, said in eodem momento or eodem nunc, as Vallesius phraseth it 
(r) Valles. de sacr. Phil. c. 1. ; the distinction of six days being made by Moses, the better to comply with our incapacities. For questionless there cannot be a better reason, why God should pass no approbation on the second days work, and double it upon the third: but that the separation of the Waters not being fully perfected till the said third day, required one special approbation from the mouth of God; as the production of the earth and the fruits thereof, which was the work of that day also, did require another. But here a question may be made concerning those waters which are said to be above the firmament; or rather of the firmament which is said to divide them. I know the general opinion of most writers is, that by the Firmament in that place we are to understand the Air: as being interposed, inter aquosam et humidam superioris Regionis molem, et● aquas marium fluminumque, between the waters of the upper Regions, and that which is dispersed in the Seas and Rivers. So junius for the Protestant Doctors 
(s) Estius et jun▪ in Gen. 1. , and Estius for those of the Church of Rome, do expound that Text; and for my part I have not been unwilling to conform to that in which both parties are agreed. But I have met of late with the Observations of a right learned man, upon some passages of Scripture 
(t) Mr. Greg. of Ch. Ch. Oxou. , in which I find some strong presumptions, that an Abyss of Waters must needs be granted to be above the highest Orb: whose Arguments I shall lay down as I find them there, and so refer the matter wholly to the Readers judgement. For first he saith, (and I think very truly) that the Waters above the Heavens called upon by David, and the three Children in their Song, to praise the Lord, cannot be taken for the watery Region of the Air: because in the same Canticle, by an express enumeration of all the Meteors, this Region is invited to the like celebration O every showers and dew, bless ye the Lord, and magnify his name for ever, saith the Benedicite. Fire and hail, snow and vapour, wind and storm, fulfilling his word, saith the book of Psalms, Psal. 148. He telleth us secondly that in the separation of the waters spoken of by Moses, the waters below the firmament, were gathered together into that Receptacle which he called the Sea, and that in the space above the firmament he laid up the rest of the deep, as in a store-house, Psal. 33.7. From whence when he uttered his voice (as at the flood) there was a multitude (or noise) of waters in the Heavens, jer. 10.13. Which lest it might be gratis dictum, he proves it by the story of the general Deluge in which the waters being said to prevail at least 15. cubits above the top of the highest mountains, must needs have more time than 40. days, and 40. nights for their falling down, according to the course of nature, unless there had been some supply from this great Abyss; and that God by an high hand had forced down those waters, which he had laid up there as in a store-house. And that there was such a supply from this infinite and inexhaustible store-house, he shows out of those words of the 7. of Genesis, where it is said that the fountains of the great deep or (as the Angel calleth them in the Book of Esdras) the springs above the firmament, were broken up: which on the abatement of the waters are said to have been stopped or shut up again, Gen. 8.2. A thing, saith he, not to be understood of any subterraneous Abyss, without an open defiance to the common principles of nature. Besides it doth appear from the Text itself, that at the first God had not caused it to rain on the earth at all (perhaps not till those times of Noah); but that a moisture went up and watered the whole face of the ground, Gen. 2.5.6. as still it is observed of the land of Egypt. And that it did continue thus till the days of Noah, may be collected from the bow which God set in the Clouds; which otherwise, as Porphyry did shrewdly gather, had been there before: and if no clouds nor rain in the times before, the Cataracts of heaven spoken of Gen. 7. 11. & 8.2. must have some other exposition than they have had formerly. Nay he collects (and indeed probably enough from his former principles) that this abundance of waters falling then from those heavenly treasuries, and sunk into the secret receptacles of the earth; have been the matter of those clouds which are and have been since occasioned and called forth by the heat and influence of the Sun, and others of the stars and celestial bodies. These are the principal reasons he insists upon. And unto those me thinks the Philosophical tradition of a Crystalline heaven, the watery Firmament we may call it, doth seem to add some strength or moment: which hath been therefore interposed between the eighth sphere and the primum mobile, that by the natural coolness and complexion of it, it might repress and moderate the fervour of the primum mobile, which otherwise by its violent and rapid motion might suddenly put all the world in a conflagration. For though perhaps there may be no such thing in nature as this Crystalline heaven, yet I am very apt to persuade myself, that the opinion was first grounded on this Text of Moses, where we are told of Waters above the Firmament; but whether rightly understood I determine not. But I desire to be excused for this excursion, though pertinent enough to the point in hand; which was to show the power and wisdom of Almighty God in ordering the whole work of the World's Creation.  
To proceed therefore where we left. As we are told in holy Scripture that God made the World, and of the time when, and the manner how he did first create it; so find we there the special motions which induced him to it. Of these the chief and ultimate is the glory of God, which not only Men and Angels do daily celebrate, but all the Creatures else set forth in their several kinds. The Heavens declare the glory of God, and the Firmament showeth his handy work, saith the royal Psalmist 
(u) Psal. 19.1. . And, Benedicite domino opera ejus, O bless the Lord, saith he, all ye works of his, Psal. 103.22. The second was to manifest his great power and wisdom, which doth most clearly show itself in the works of his hands: there being no creature in the world, no not the most contemptible and inconsiderable, of all the rest, in making or preserving which we do not find a character of God's power and goodness. For not the Angels only, and the Sun and Moon, nor Dragons only, and the Beasts of more noble nature; but even the very worms are called on to extol God's name 
(x) Psal. 148.10. . All come within the compass of laudate Dominum; and that upon this reason only, He spoke the word, and they were made, he commanded, and they were created. In the third place comes in the Creation of Angels and men, that as the inanimate and irrational creatures do afford sufficient matter to set forth God's goodness: so there might be some creatures of more excellent nature, which might take all occasions to express the same; who therefore are more frequently and more especially required to perform this duty. Benedicite Domino omnes Angeli ejus, O praise the Lord all ye Angels of his, ye that excel in strength, ye that fulfil his commandments (for the Angels are but ministering spirits, Psal. 104.4.) and harken to the voice of his words 
(y) Psa. 103.20. . And as for men, he calls upon them four times in one only Psalms, to discharge this Office, which showeth how earnestly he expecteth it from them. O that men would therefore praise the LORD for his goodness, and declare the wonders which he doth to the children of men 
(z) Psal. 107.8, 15, etc. . Then follows his selecting of some men out of all the rest, into that sacred body which we call the Church: whom he hath therefore saved from the hands of their enemies, that they might serve him without fear, in righteousness and holiness all the days of their lives 
(a) Luk. 74, 75. . And therefore David doth not only call upon mankind generally to set forth the goodness of the Lord; but particularly on the Church. Praise the Lord O Jerusalem, Praise thy God O Zion 
(b) Psa. 147.12. . And that not only with and amongst the rest, but more than any other of the sons of men. How so? because, he showeth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his Ordinances unto Israel. A favour not vouchsafed to other Nations, nor have the Heathen knowledge of his laws; for so it followeth in that Psalm, v. 19, 20. The Church then because most obliged is most bound to praise him; according to that divine rule of eternal justice, that unto whomsoever more is given, of him the more shall be required. And last of all, the Lord did therefore in the time when it seemed best to him, accomplish this great work of the World's Creation: that as his infinite power was manifested in the very making, so he might exercise his Providence, and show his most incomprehensible wisdom, in the continual preservation and support thereof.  
And certainly it is not easy to determine whether his Power were greater in the first Creation, or his Providence more wonderful and of greater consequence, in the continual goverance of the World so made: which questionless had long before this time relapsed to its primitive nothing, had he not hitherto supported it by his mighty hand. For not alone these sublunary creatures which we daily see, nor yet the heavenly bodies which we look on with such admiration; but even the Heaven of Heavens, and the Hosts thereof▪ Archangels, Angels, Principalities, Powers, or by what name soever they are called in Scripture, enjoy their actual existence and continual being, not from their own nature, or their proper Essence, but from the goodness of their Maker. For he it is (as St. Paul telleth us in the Acts) who hath not only made the World and all things therein, but still gives life and breath unto every creature 
(c) Act. 17.24, 25, 26. , and hath determined of the times before appointed, and also of the bounds of their habitation. And so much Seneca, Paul's dear friend (if there be any truth in those letters which do bear their names) hath affirmed also. Manent cuncta, non quia aeterna sunt, sed quia defenduntur cura Regentis. Immortalia tutore non egent. Haec autem conservat Artifex, fragilitatem materiae vi sua vincens 
(d) Senec. Epi. 58. . All things (saith he) continue in being as at first they were, not because they are eternal in their own nature, but because they be defended by the Providence of their Governor. Things in themselves Immortal have no need of a guardian. But those things are preserved by the power of their Maker, which over-ruleth the weakness of the matter, out of which they are made. So that it seems by the Philosophy of this learned man, that the creature is preserved from perishing, not by any power which it hath in itself, but by the power and providence of its Heavenly Maker. And this no less true in the Divinity of the holy Scriptures. How long before this present time, had the unbridled Ocean overwhelmed the land, had not God set bounds unto it which it shall not pass, nor turn again to cover the earth 
(e) Psal. 104.9. ? What a combustion had the World been brought into long before this time, by the perpetual jarring of contrary Elements, had not GOD so disposed it by his heavenly Providence, as to interpose this vast airy Firmament betwixt the Elements of fire and water, and so to temper drought with moisture, that neither should be able to consume the other? How long before this time had those many millions of men which possess the World, perished for want of food, and devoured one another; had not he opened his hand, and filled all things living with plenteousness 
(f) Psal. 145.16. ? did not he give the former and the latter rain, making the Valleys fruitful, and so full of corn, that they do seem to laugh and sing, in the Psalmists language 
(g) Psal. 65 14. ? How long before this time had the race of mankind been utterly exterminated out of all the world, by those violent and consuming Wars, which have raged in every part thereof since the times of Nimrod; since men began to hunt after one another, and made the sword the instrument of their lusts and cruelties; did not he keep unto himself the Sovereign power of making wars to cease 
(h) Psal. 46. ●.  whensoever he pleaseth, and sending Peace into our borders 
(i) Psal. 147: 14.  when we look not for it? Finally, not to instance in more particulars, how long before this time had the World been emptied of Inhabitants, and no place peopled but the Graves, by the continual prevalency of Plagues and Leprosies, and other pestilent diseases, which the intemperance of diet, or the malignant influences of the heavenly bodies have so oft produced: had not he given a Medicinal virtue unto herbs and plants for cure of ordinary but contagious sicknesses; and say to his destroying Angel, that it is enough 
(k) 2 King. 24.16. , when the devouring Plagues do most fiercely rage? That Pestilence which cut off seventy thousand men in less space than a day, must needs have utterly destroyed all mankind in less space than a year, had not the Lord restrained the fury of it by his grace and goodness. Look where we will, cast we our eyes on every side upon all the creatures, and we shall find as much of God's wonderful Providence in their preservation, as of his mighty Power in the first Creation. That he spoke the word and they were made, that he commanded only and they were created; is the most notable effect of his mighty Power: But that he made them fast even for ever and ever 
(l) Psal. 148.5, 6. , and gave them such a law for their rule and governance, as shall not be broken, is a more admirable effect of his singular Providence.  
When therefore it is said in the holy Scriptures that God rested on the seventh day from all the works which he had made; we are to understand it thus, that he desisted then from adding any thing unto the work of his hands, which he had finished and made perfect the six days before; but not from ordering and disposing of it as he sees occasion; which is a work as highly to be prized as the first Creation, and from the which God never resteth, no not on the Sabbath. Sempër videmus Deum operari & Sabbatum nullum est in quo non operetur, in quo non producat solem suum super bonos & malos 
(m) Origen. hom. 23. in Num. . Sabbaths and all days are alike in regard of Providence, in reference to the universal government of the World and Nature. Nor is there any day, saith Origen, whereon God doth rest from the Administration of the World by him created, on which he doth not make his Sun to shine both on good and bad, and makes his rain to fall on the just and wicked. Pater meus usque modo operatur saith CHRIST our Saviour 
(n) Joh. 5.17. . I work (saith he) and my Father also worketh to this very time. By which our Saviour meaneth (as S. Augustine notes) that God rested not from ordering the things which he had created, Nec ullam sibi cessationis statuisse diem 
(o) August. cont. Faust. Man. l. 16. c. 6. , and that there was no day whatsoever it was in which he tended not the preservation of the creature: and therefore for his own part that he would not cease from doing the will of him that sent him, Ne Sabbatis quidem, no not so much as on the Sabbath. It was the folly or the frenzy of the Epicureans, that they rob God of his Providence, and made him nothing but a dull Spectator, an idle and unnecessary looker on; letting all worldly matters go, as they would themselves. Et Deos aut otiosos finxit aut nullos 
(p) Minut. Fel. , said the Christian Advocate. The Stoics saw this Error and took care to avoid it, but then they fell upon as bad, appointing that which they called Fate, in the place of Providence, and by that Fate so tying up the hands of GOD that he could do nothing, but what was formerly decreed and resolved upon. Which were it so, Cur non illae potius regnare dicantur 
(q) Lact. l. 1. c. 11. , as wittily Lactantius scoffeth it, why was not Fate and Destiny put in the place of God, which even the Gods themselves are compelled to obey? The Peripatetics therefore thought it to be better Divinity, to grant to GOD the oversight and superinspection of all, but yet ascribed so much unto second causes, that they left little more to be done by GOD, then to set the first wheel, as it were, on going, and leave the rest to move in their course and order. Which though it came more near the truth, yet it comes not home: the Providence of God being so particular, that the very hairs of our head are said to be numbered 
(r) Mat. 10.29. , and that a Sparrow doth not fall to the ground without his knowledge and permission. But leaving this discourse of God's general Providence, we will consider it at the present in these principal parts, his goodness towards all his creatures; his justice in the governance of humane affairs, concluding this with that of Alexander Aphrodiseus, a great Aristotelean, who pleads thus in behalf of this general Providence. Quod Deus inferiorum rerum curam gerere nolit, a Dei natura alienum est nimis, etc. 
(s) Alex. Aphrod. l. de Provident.  To say, saith he, that GOD refuseth to take care of inferior things, is too too much abhorrent from the nature of God; or makes him liable to the passions of an envious man. And on the other side, to say he could not do it, were altogether as unworthy, and to make him impotent: neither of which by any means may be said of God. And therefore we must needs determine, that God is both willing and able to take care of all things, which he hath made already, or shall make hereafter.  
And first the goodness of the Lord, though indivisible in itself, (as all things in him) hath been divided by the Schoolmen, with very good propriety both of words and meaning, into these kinds: the one of which they call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Original; the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, exemplified; Illa in Deo existens, haec in Creaturis expressa, the first existing solely in the Lord our God, the other manifested in his Creatures. That which they call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Original, we may define to be an Everlasting and unalterable quality in the Lord our God, qua modis omnibus &. sum bonus est, by which he is supremely and entirely good. In which regard the Divine Plato said of God, that he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, good only in and of himself; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the only saving good, the most desirable felicity, as others of the Heathen called him. And he that knew him best, our most gracious Saviour, hath given this to us for a Maxim, Vnus est bonus, DEUS, that there is none good but only God 
(u) Mat. 19.17. : so good, that his most blessed vision is the summum bonum, the highest and supremest good, that any of the Saints and Angels can aspire unto. The other species of goodness, which the Schools call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Exemplified, is that which God hath manifested on his Creatures, and imparted to them: and this they do again divide into general, and special; that being extended unto all his Creatures, this more particularly restrained to his chosen servants. His general goodness he hath shown, as before was noted, in the continual preservation of the works of his hands, clothing the hills with grass, and the vales with corn; feeding the Lions and young Ravens, when they call upon him; apparelling the Lilies with a greater beauty, then that of Solomon in his greatest glory; making his Sun to shine, and his rain to fall, as well upon the sinner as the righteous person; and in a word, opening his hand, and filling all things living with his plenteousness. In which respect it is most truly said by the Royal Psalmist, Repleta est Terra bonitate Domini, the Earth is full of the goodness of the Lord, Psal. 32.5. His special goodness he restraineth to his chosen servants, to such as fear his name, and observe his Precepts. The Lord is good to Israel, saith the Prophet David, even unto all such as are of a clean heart 
(x) Psal. 73.1.  And so the Prophet jeremy in the Lamentations, The Lord is good to them that wait for him, to the soul that seeketh him 
(y) Lam. 3.25.  This manifested in delivering them from the evils both of sin and punishment; and in accumulating on them his sacred blessings both of Grace and Glory. Goodness is graciousness in this sense; and to be good is only to be kind and gracious. Sis bonus O felixque tuis, in the Poet's language. And then we have it thus expressed in the words of David, viz. The Lord is gracious, and full of compassion, slow to anger, and of great mercy 
(z) Psal. 145.8. : that is to say, of great mercy in the pardon of our sins and wickednesses; and gracious in the free collation of the gifts of the holy Spirit, which therefore are called Graces quia gratis data. By grace we are made fit for mercy, by mercy capable of glory. And by his grace and mercy on his chosen servants, doth he preserve the world from those dreadful plagues, which else would fall upon the wicked: from whom he doth withhold his hand, and keep off his vengeance, out of that grace and mercy to the righteous persons, amongst whom they live. For certainly it is most true which Ruffinus telleth us, Mundum sanctorum meritis stare 
(a) Ruffin. in Symbol. , that the World hath hitherto been preserved by the prayers of the Saints. And 'tis as true which is affirmed by Stapleton, a learned Papist, Deum propter bonos sustinere malos 
(b) Staplet. in promptuar. , that God gives many temporal blessings to ungodly men, because they live so intermingled with his faithful servants: and respites them sometimes from the hand of punishment, not for their own, but for the righteous persons sake, amongst whom they dwell. If Sodom stood so long unpunished, it was because of righteous Lot, who then dwelled amongst them 
(c) Gen. 18.32 etc. . And possibly it might have stood to this very day, at least have scaped that fiery deluge which then fell upon it, had it contained no more than teri righteous persons. Far be it from the Lord our God to stay the godly with the wicked. The Judge of all the World is more just than so. When God raineth vengeance from above on the wicked man, it cannot be but that the righteous must partake of the common miseries; which do befall that State or Nation in the which he liveth; as Abraham, Isaac, jacob did of those several famines which God had sent upon their Neighbours. There are not always such distinctions, as was between the land of Goshen and the rest of Egypt. God therefore sometimes holds his hands, when the sins of wicked men cry loud for vengeance, out of his grace and mercy to the righteous man; or else abbreviates the time of their tribulation out of respect unto his chosen. If they partake alike of the common miseries of Famine, Pestilence, War, as sometimes they do: it is because that even the best men have their imperfections, and ever and anon commit some foul sins, which God thinks fit to expiate with a temporal Purgatory.  
But justice bears the greatest stroke in all Public Governments. Mercy and Grace, although they be the fairest flowers in the Royal Diadem, are used but at some times, and on choice occasions. But justice is the standing and perpetual rule, by which Kings reign, and order the affairs of their several States. And this the Civil Lawyers do define to be Perpetua & constant voluntas jus suum cuique tribuendi 
(d) justin. Institut. l. 1. c. 1. , a constant and perpetual purpose to give to every man his due. Which definition well acordeth with that heavenly justice which is Original in God, and essential to him: since that the Will of God is the only Standard, by which his justice is directed in the Government of the World and mankind. Norma justitiae divinae est voluntas Dei, as the old Rule was; a shadow of which Sovereign power we may behold in some of the Roman Emperors; who though they ruled the people by the advice of the Senate, yet ruled the Senate as they pleased, and made the intimation of their own will and pleasure, to pass as currant as Law. Quod Principi placuerit Legis habet valorem 
(e) Ibid. 1. , saith the book of Institutes. And such almost is the conclusion of those Royal Edicts which daily is set out by the French Kings, which generally ends with these formal words, Car tel est nostre plaisir; for such is our pleasure. But this in these and other Princes of the like authority, is rather a character of power, than a Rule of justice: the Rule of justice being to be strait and even, and always constant to itself; not alterable on occasions, or turned aside by passions and humane affections. The will of God is subject to no such vicissitudes, to such turns and changes, as the wills of men; but an unalterable and most constant rule, without variation, such as the rule of equal and impartial justice is of right to be. And by this rule it is that the Lord proceedeth in executing justice over all the World. Which justice either doth consist in the performance of his promises, (for even a just and righteous man is as good as his word) and then it may be called veracitas; and is a species or kind of Commutative justice: or else in punishing or rewarding the sons of men, according to the exigence of their several works, and then it hath the name of distributiva, or distributive justice. That part thereof which doth consist in the performance of his promises, and is called Veracitas, may be defined to be a constant and unalterable purpose in Almighty God, of bringing every thing to pass, which he hath either promised to the sons of men, or spoke concerning them by his holy Prophets, which have been since the World began. In the first sense it is said so often of him in the holy Scripture, that he remembered the Covenant made with Abraham, Isaac, and jacob, performing to their seed and their children after them, whatsoever he was pleased to promise: more generally by the Royal Psalmist, Custodit veritatem in seculum, that he keepeth his promise for ever, Psal. 146.6. And in the other sense, it was said unto the Virgin Mary by her Cousin Elizabeth, that there should be a performance of all those things which had been told her by the Lord, Luk. 1.45. by the Apostle, that all the Promises of God in Christ Jesus are yea and Amen, 2 Cor. 1.20. by CHRIST himself, that Heaven and earth should pass away, but that there was not one Iod or title in the Word of God, which in due time should not be accomplished. If it consist in punishing the impenitent sinner, or chastising his own dear children for their wilful follies; we then call it punitive, and so it comes within the compass of God's heavenly anger, which as St. Augustine doth define it, non aliud est quam voluntas puniendi, is nothing but the will of God to punish such as do offend against his Commandments. If in rewarding those who conform themselves (as far as humane frailty will permit) to his laws and precepts; it is called Remunerative, and hath a great admixture in it both of love and mercy, in passing by our faults to reward our faith: that saying of St. Bernard being always true, Semper invenies Deum benigniorem quam te culpabilem 
(f) Bern. Ser. 11. . Nay even his anger or his punitive justice is so mixed with goodness, that in the midst of judgement he remembreth mercy, and dealeth not so extremely with us as we have deserved: it being as true, which I find noted by Nicephorus, Deum vindictae gladium oleo misericordiae semper acuere 
(g) Niceph. Hist. Eccles. l. 17. c. 3. , that God doth always scour the sword of his vengeance with the oil of his mercy. The World had been reduced by this time to its former nothing, had not he sweetened the severity of his judgements by the balm of his mercies; and grown into a Wilderness or vast confusion, had he not held in by his justice the exorbitant power of those who make their lusts and their wills a Law.  
And certainly, if we consult the Monuments and Records of former times, we shall find no Age nor State of men or Nations, which do not give us evident and plain examples of God's proceedings in this kind, when the necessities of his Church, or the sins of men do require it of him. The subtle tyranny of the Egyptians had not only taught them to oppress God's people for the present, but to extinguish the whole race of them for the time to come: and therefore a command was given to the Midwives of Egypt, to murder all the Male Children which were born to Israel 
(h) Exod. 1.16. . Did not God scourge them with their own rod, and pay them in their own coin, as we use to say, when he slew all the firstborn in the land of Egypt? And possibly the piety & compassion of the Midwives of Egypt, in sparing many of the Male children whom they might have murdered, occasioned God to lay the fury of his vengeance on the firstborn Male 
(i) Exo, 12.30. , & not on any of the Females throughout the Country. When David surfeiting on plenty and the sweets of power, not only had defiled the wife, but destroyed the husband▪ how fitly did God square the punishment unto the offence? 
(k) 2 Sam. 13.14, 29.  For presently a violent mixture of rape and incest is committed by one of his own sons on his daughter Tamar; that rape revenged not long after in the death of the Ravisher: the Murderer getting in short time such a potent party, as to drive his Father out of Jerusalem, and to defile his Wives and Concubines in the fight of the people 
(l) 2 Sam. 16.22. . When David was restored to his Crown again, and growing vain in conceit of his own great power, must needs command a general muster to be made of all his subjects; that all the World might see of what strength he was, and stand in fear of his displeasure 
(m) 2 Sam. 24. : how justly did God punish him and take down his pride, in cutting off so many thousands of his people in whose strength he trusted, and bringing him to this confession, that all his strength and power was from God alone. The loss of so many of his subjects was a loss to David, (the glory of a King consisting in the multitude of his subjects, as the Wiseman tells us) And though David interceded for them, and took all the fault upon himself, saying in the affliction of a troubled soul, At oves istae quid fecerunt? what had those sheep done? yet was there none at all of that seventy thousand, who had not many ways offended against God's Commandments, and therefore had deserved death as the wages of sin 
(o) Rom. 6. ult. . How patiently did God bear with the house of judah, in their Idolatries and apostasy from his Laws and Precepts? how frequently did he command them to rely on him in all times of danger? By consequence, how justly did he plague them by the hands of Idolatrous Nations; and give them over as a prey to the Babylonians 
(p) 2 King. 20.13. , whose favour they had courted in undecent ways, and such as argued a distrust of God's power or favour? And when those Babylonian Princes whom God used as scourges to punish the transgressions of the house of judah, began so far to forget God, and to contemn that power which raised them to that height of Empire, as to profane the Vessels of his holy Temple in their drunken Feasts 
(q) Dan. 5.3, 4. , did not God throw them in the fire (so tender Mothers do their rods) as no longer serviceable; and give over to the hands of the Medes and Persians? And when the Medes and Persians of a frugal People began to drench themselves in wine and prohibited pleasures, growing as sordid and effeminate as Sardanapalus, as drunken and gluttonous as Belshazzar: how soon did God subvert their Empire, and eclipse their glories, by the hands of an impuissant though a valiant Prince; whom also, when he fell into the Persian riots, he cut off in the very midst of his youth and conquests. The many moral virtues in the people of Rome, their Temperance, justice, Valour, and Magnanimity, it pleased God to reward with a temporal Monarchy; the greatest that ever the Sun had shined on, in the times before. But when together with the conquest of Asia, they had brought home the Asian vices and effeminacy, making their lusts their law, and their wills the rule by which their actions must be squared, and the whole World governed: God plagued them first with Civil and unnatural wars, after subjected them unto the lust and arbitrary rule of their fellow Citizen. And finally when the Christian faith was so far from reclaiming them, that they became a scandal and dishonour to it 
(r) Salvian de Gubern. Dei. ; he gave them over as a prey to those barbarous Nations, who either knew not Christ at all, or else were as erroneous in points of Doctrine, as the Romans were grown scandalous in matter of practice. Infinitum esset ire per singula. It were an infinite attempt to follow God's justice by the tract over all the World: although the footsteps of it be so plain and evident, that he would hardly lose his way that should undertake it: there being no National History either old, or modern, in which we find not many notable instances to evince this truth; that God is just in all his ways, and righteous in all his works 
(s) Psal: 145.17. , and that he meeteth such measure to the sons of men, wherewith they meted unto others 
(t) Mat. 7.11. . Some more examples of the which he that lusts to see, may find them summed up in the Preface of Sir Walter Raleigh before his History of the World, though to say truth, we need not look far before us. For certainly if all the instances of God's justice had been lost in the world, and there were no monument of writing left to the former times; the very times and Countries in which we live, would give us such and so many sad remembrances, as are sufficient in themselves to set forth God's justice, and make it more remarkable than all ancient stories. The Instances whereof I had rather the Ingenuous and discerning Reader should make unto himself then expect from me. Let no man therefore in the pride of his worldly wisdom ●est in the success of a prosperous mischief, or flatter and deceive his poor soul with this, that God doth not see it. For though God seems to wink, yet his eyes are open; and doth not only see, but will bring to light the practices of wicked and malicious men, though never so secretly contrived, or so cunningly plotted. And his Divine justice, though slow paced at first, will overtake us at long running, how much soever we may seem to have got the start: God dealing still with wicked and bloodthirsty men, as heretofore with Haman, Absalon, Achitophel, and such other Instruments. When they have served his turn, than he hangs them up. And so I close this point of the Divine justice of the true God, with that which a false God truly said in behalf thereof; for thus the Oracle of Apollo, as Porphyrius citeth him.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
Which with some little alteration may be Englished thus; 
Let no man think to blind the Eye of Heaven,  
With juggling plots or colours smooth and even.  
God fills all places, and sees round about;  
He that made all things, shall not he find out?   
And yet I would not have it gathered out of this discourse, that because GOD'S justice in these cares hath been quick and sudden, and followed close on the offence, it must be always so on the like occasions; or else that question may be made, whether he hath forgotten to be just and gracious, or that the Divine Providence be asleep and regards us not. The Providence of God in ordering humane affairs is no less eminent in suffering wicked men to prosper, and sin to scape unpunished in the present world: then if the Divine vengeanee of Almighty God followed them close upon the heels. God useth the exorbitant lusts and passions of the wicked man, as the wise Physicians do poisons in the course of Physic, thereby to purge some hurtful and predominant humour out of the bodies of his Saints: which otherwise might grow too corrupt and rank, and draw them into such diseases as were irrecoverable. For though God hath no need of the wicked man for the manifestation of his glory, who can by other means effect what himself best pleaseth: yet since men will be wicked and given up to sin, God may and will effect by them what he hath a mind to, Aut nescientibus iis aut nolentibus, either against their wills, or besides their purposes. God neither doth incline them, nor excite them to those works of wickedness, (whatsoever some are pleased to say unto the contrary) no nor so much as to permit them, but in this sense only, as he affordeth them not such a measure of grace by which they must have been restrained from the acts of sin. Only he makes this use of their lewd affections, their cruelty, ambition, or such other lusts, as he finds most predominant in them; that they become fit instruments to set forth his glory, and execute his vengeance when he seeth occasion. Non operando in malis quod ei displicet, sed operando per malos quod ei placet 
(a) Fulgent. ad Monin. , as Fulgentius hath it. Thus used he the envy which the sons of jacob did carry most unworthily towards their brother joseph, as a great means of saving them and all their families in the following Famine, with which he did intend to afflict those parts. And so much joseph doth acknowledge, when he said unto them; that they should not be afraid nor troubled because they sold him into Egypt when he was a child 
(b) Gen. 45.5, 7. . Pro salute enim vestra misit me Deus ante vos in Aegyptum; for God had sent him into Egypt before hand for their preservation. So also in the case of our blessed Saviour, of whom joseph was a Type or figure: the Lord determined out of his counsel and foreknowledge (as St. Peter telleth us 
(c) Act. 2.23. , that he should be the Propitiation for the sins of the world; and in due time he made the avarice of judas, and the malice of the Scribes and Pharisees, his means and instruments, that by their wicked hands and obdurate hearts, he might be crucified and slain. So used he the ambition of the Kings of Babylon, to punish and chastise his people of the house of judah; and the desire of glory which he found in Titus, for the subversion of that wicked and perverse generation, who had not only made themselves drunk with the blood of the Prophets, but against all rules of Law and justice, had filled themselves with the blood of the Son of God. Thus when he had a mind to assay jobs patience, he used the Chaldees and wild Arabs, who did trade in thievery; to fall upon the herds of his Kine and Camels; and was content the Devil should try some experiments on his body also, to leave the fairer pattern of unconquered patience for the times to come. And though in these and other occasions of this nature, he make use of the wicked to effect his purposes; yet he rewardeth them answerably to their deservings: proportioning their Wages to their own intentions, and not according unto that effect which he works out of them. Recipient vero non pro eo quod Deus bene usus est eorum operibus malis, sed quod ipsi male usi sunt Dei operibus bonis 
(d) Fulgent. ad Monin. , said Fulgentius truly. And though some of them have the hap, or the seeming happiness, to go down into the grave in peace, and carry the reputation with them of successful wickedness; yet God will find them out at last, and meet with these sour grapes in his general Vintage, and tread them in the Wine-press of his indignation. And to say truth, there are as great and weighty reasons, why some men's punishments should follow after them, as that the rest should have a trial and essay of their future miseries; by those which they endure in this present life. For as St. Augustine well observeth, if all men's sins were punished in this present world, Nihil ultimo judicio reservari putaretur, it would occasion some to think that there were no necessity nor use of the general judgement 
(e) August. de Civit. Dei. l. 1. c. 8. : and on the other side if none, Nulla esse divina providentia crederetur, others would be too apt to think that there were no Providence, and say with him in David's Psalms, Tush! God doth not see it. God therefore doth so order the affairs of this present life, as may be most subservient unto that to come: not giving such success to the prayers of his servants, as they think most conducible unto their estates, but as he thinks most expedient for them, in reference to a better life than what here they have. And if he do not always give the victory to the justest cause, but that the good man may complain as once Cato did, Victrix causa placet superis, sed victa Catoni 
(f) Lucan. Pharsal. , that the worst cause sped best in the chance of war: that also is a special testimony of his heavenly Providence. For either they which seem to have the justest cause may manage it by wicked and ungodly instruments, or else rely too much on the Arm of flesh; or God may possibly foresee, that they will use the Victory unto his dishonour, or grow secure and negligent of all pious duties upon the strength of that success. In all which cases if God give them over to the hands of their enemies, they have no reason to complain of Almighty God; as if he either were not just in his distributions, or that his Providence were asleep, or too highly busied, to look upon such passages as are here beneath. God doth that which is most agreeable to his heavenly justice, in punishing the sins of those whom he loves most tenderly, with some temporal punishments; that they may scape the wrath of the day to come: and lets the wicked man go on with success and glory, until he hath made up the measure of his sins and wickednesses, and so is fitted and prepared for the day of slaughter. But of this Argument it is enough to have said a little: the Providence of God in governing the affairs of the present world, being a point so generally granted by the sober Heathens, that Aristotle being asked what answer should be given to those who made question of it, is said to have replied, The whip. His meaning was, that they who beware so irreligious, as to make any doubt of God's heavenly providence, were rather to be answered with stripes then with demonstrations. And with this resolution I conclude this Chapter and the point together.   

CHAP. V. Of the Creation of Angels; the ministry and office of the good; the fall and punishment of the evil Angels: And also of the Creation and fall of Man.  
OF the Creation of the World we have spoken before; and are now come to speak of the creation of Angels and Men, as the more noble parts thereof. These, though included in those words of Heaven and Earth, according as they stand in the Creed, are more significantly expressed by the Nicene Fathers: who to those words of Heaven and Earth, have added as by way of Gloss or Commentary, and of all things visible and invisible. That under the notion of things visible they intended Man, as well as any other visible work of the whole Creation, is a thing past question. And that by things invisible they did mean the Angels, will prove to be as clear as that, and testified by St. Paul expressly, saying, that By him all things were created, whether in Heaven or Earth, visible or invisible; whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers, all things were created by him, and for him 
(a) Coloss. 1.16. . In which we have not only the Apostles testimony, that by the things invisible are meant the Angels; but an enumeration of the several ranks and degrees of Angels, which were created by the power of the Lord our God. Of these degrees and ranks we shall speak anon; having prepared our way unto that discourse, by taking first a short survey of the angelical nature. For the quid nominis, to begin first with that, it is merely Greek; and English word Angel, and the Latin Angelus, being the same in sound and sense, with the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and that derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, nuntio, which is to carry a message, or to go of an errand. Angelus then is no more than nuncius, an Angel but a messenger in our English language. And so it it expressed by Lactantius, saying, Habe● enim Ministros quos vocamus nuncios 
(b) Lact. l. 1.7. . This as it notifyeth their name, and the reason of it, so doth it signify their office; for Angelus nomen est officii non naturae, (as the Fathers tell us) which is to be the messengers from God to Man, as oft as there is any important business which requires it of them; to be the Nuncios as it were, from God's supreme holiness, to manage his affairs with the sons of men. And unto this the Apostle also doth agree, telling us that they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or ministering Spirits, sent forth to minister unto them that shall be heirs of Salvation 
(c) Heb. 1.14. . Spirits they are according to the nature in which they were made, and Ministering Spirits (or Ministers as he calleth them out of David, v. 7.) with reference to the office unto which designed. We have their nature in the word Spirits, which showeth them to be pure incorporeal substances, not made of any corrupt matter as the bodies of men, and so not having any internal principle of being, they can have none neither of dissolution: and yet as Creatures made by the hand of God they are reducible to nothing by the hand that made them, although they have not in themselves any passive principle, to make them naturally moral. It is the privilege or prerogative of Almighty God to be purely Simple, without composition, parts, or passion. The Angels though they come most near him, yet fall short of this. Who though they are not made of a matter and form, and so not naturally subject to the law of corruption: yet are they made up or compounded of Act and Power, (or Actus aud Potentia, in the School-mens language) an Act by which they are, a Power into which they may be reduced. And being so made up of an Act of being, and a Power of not being, (though probably that Power shall never be reduced into Act) they fall exceeding short of the nature of GOD, whose name is, I AM, and is so, that it is impossible that he should not be, or be any other than he is; God being as uncapable of change, as of composition. Nay, so great is the difference betwixt their nature and the nature of God, so infinitely do they fall short of his incomprehensible and unspeakable Purity, that though in comparison of Men (as well as in themselves) they are truly Spirits; yet in comparison of GOD we may call them bodies.  
But whatsoever their condition and ingredients be, they owe not only unto God their continual being, by whom they are so made as to be free from corruption; but unto him they are indebted for their first original, without which they had not been at all. St. Paul, we see, doth reckon them amongst things created; and so doth David too in the Book of Psalms. Where calling upon all the Creatures to set forth God's praises, he first brings in the Angels to perform that office, and then descends unto the Heavens and the other Creatures. O praise the Lord of Heaven (saith he) praise him in the height 
(e) Ps. 148.1, 2. ; Praise him all ye Angels of his, praise him all his Hosts, Praise him Sun and Moon, etc. Then adds of these and all the rest of the hosts of heaven, He spoke the word, and they were made; he commanded, and they were created. This with that passage of St. Paul before mentioned make it plain enough, that the Angels were created by Almighty God. And to this truth all sorts of writers whatsoever, which do allow the being of Angels, do attest unanimously. Apollo in the Oracles ascribed unto him, having laid down the incommunicable▪ Attributes of God, concludes it thus; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(f) Ap. Lact. l. 1. c. 7. , that such is God, of whom the Angels are but the smallest portion. Where though Apollo (or the Devil in Apollo's statue) would fain be thought to be an Angel, and as an Angel would be thought to have somewhat in him, which might entitle him to be a Godhead: yet he confesseth plainly that he owed his being to the power of God, and was to be obedient unto his commands. Hosthanes one of the chief of the Eastern Magis, not only did allow of Angels, as the Ministers and messengers of the only God; but made them so subservient to his will and power 
(g) Minut. Fel. , ut vultu Domini territi contremiscant, that they could not look upon him without fear and trembling. A Creature therefore doubtless, not of self-existence; and a Creature of Gods making too, or else what need they tremble when they look upon him? Of Plato it is said by Tertullian briefly, Angelos Plato non negavit 
(h) Tertull. Apolog. c. 22. ; but by Minutius more expressly, that he did not only believe that there were Angels, but came so near the knowledge of their constitution, as to affirm that they were inter mortalem et immortalem mediam substantiam 
(i) Minut. Fel. , a substance of a middle nature betwixt immortal and mortal: that is to say, not so eternally immortal as Almighty God, nor yet so subject to mortality, as the children of men. And herein Aristotle comes up close to his Master Plato affirming more like a Divine then a Philosopher, that to the perfection of the World there were required three sorts of substances: the first wholly invisible, which must be the Angels; the second wholly visible, as the Heaven and Earth; and the third partly visible, and invisible partly, or made up of both. And this saith he is none but man, compounded of a visible body and an invisible soul. The Angels then, though reckoned amongst things invisible, yet being reckoned amongst such things as necessarily concurred to the World's perfection: must have the same Creator which first made the World, and made it in that full perfection which it still enjoyeth: and such as hath before been proved, could be none but GOD.  
The matter in dispute amongst learned men, is not about the Power, by which, but the time when they were created: In which as in a matter undetermined by the word of God, every man takes the liberty of his own opinion; and for me they may. Some think that their Creation is included in the first words of Genesis, where God is said to have created the Heaven and the Earth 
(k) Estius in Gen. 1. : others, when God said, Fiat lux, Let there be light, and that from thence they have the title of the Angels of light. Some will not have them made till the fourth day, when the Sun and Moon, and others of the Stars were made, whose Orbs they say are whirled about by these Intelligences: Cum ab omnibus receptum sit ab illis Coelos torqueri, saith Peter Martyr 
(m) Loc. Com. Class. 1. c. 12. . But that they were created in one of the six days, is the received opinion of all late Divines, whether they be of the Pontifician or the Protestant party. If so, I would fain know the reason why Moses writing purposely of the World's Creation, should pretermit the Masterpiece of that wondrous work: and not as well take notice of the Creation of the Angels, as of the making of the Heavens, and the Sun, and Moon, or of the Earth, and other sublunary Creatures. I know the common answer is, that Moses did therein consult the frailty of the jews his Countrymen; who having been very well acquainted with the Idolatries of Egypt, might easily have been induced to the worship of Angels, had they found any thing in Scripture of that noble subject; or else because being acquainted with the things of God, he would not trust them with a secret of so high a nature. Angelorum non meminit, quia scribebat rudibus Judaeis, illius secretioris doctrinae parum capacibus, saith Estius the jesuit for the Pontificians. That he did purposely omit it, Peter Martyr granteth, but saith that it was propter hominum proclivitatem ad Idololatriam, because of their inclination to Idolatry. For my part I confess these answers do not satisfy me. For neither were the jews so untaught a people, as not to have been told of those Ministering Spirits, which did so frequently appear to Abraham, Isaac, and jacob. And if they were so prone unto Idolatry, as they say they were, I cannot see but that the pretermission of the Creation of Angels, might rather give them some occasion to commit Idolatry, than any way divert them from it. For when they found by reading in the book of Genesis, that not only Let bowed himself down before the Angels which appeared unto him 
(n) Gen. 19.1. , but that the same reverence or worship (call it which we will) had been performed unto them by their Father Abraham 
(o) Gen. 18.2. ; and yet could not meet with nothing touching their creation: might not they probably conclude, that sure the Angels were no creatures, but rather a nature so divine and excellent that it were no impiety to worship them with religious worship. There must be therefore somewhat else which did occasion this omission, whatsoever it was. And why that reason may not be, because it did not fall within the compass of the six days work (which Moses only undertook to lay down before us) I must confess for my part I can see no reason. That they were made before the fourth day, is most plain in Scripture. Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the Earth, said God to job, when the morning stars sung together, and all the Sons of God shouted for joy 
(p) Job 38.4, 7. ? St. Augustine hereupon inferreth, jam ergo erant Angeli quando facta sunt sydera, facta autem sunt sydera die quarto 
(q) August. de Civit. dei. l. 11. c. 9 . Therefore (saith he) the Angels were created before the stars; for other Sons of God there were none but they to magnify and applaud that most glorious work. Before the fourth day then, that's clear. And I am apt enough to think, till I see better evidence to the contrary, that they were made before the first. Certain I am the Tenor of the Greek Fathers went this way confessedly: whose testimonies I would here produce to make good the assertion, but that I have confitentem reum. For Estius himself doth confess ingenuously, Quod multi Patres Graeci tradunt Angelos aliquandiu creatos ante Mundum corporeum 
(r) Estius in Gen. 1. ; that many of the Greek Fathers were of opinion, that the Angels were created for some space of time before this visible and corporeal World. And Estius himself, for aught I can see, is of the same opinion also, who telleth it for a manifest truth in another place, that the Angels did not fall from the love of God, in the first moment, as it were, of their Creation: Sed aliquanto tempore in justitia stetisse 
(s) Estius in Ezech. 28. , but that they did abide awhile in the state of righteousness, though they did not persevere therein, as the others did. Assuredly had they been created in the six days work, their continuance in the state of Grace had been so short, that it could hardly have been called Aliquantum temporis. But whether Estius might so mean, I determine not. The Greek Fathers, as he saith, for the most part did; and so did many of the Latins. Lactantius I am sure was of this opinion; and thereby answereth the objection which Hortensius made, touching the loneliness and solitude of Almighty God, before the making of the World. Tanquam nos qui unum esse dicimus, desertum ac solitarium esse dicamus. Habet enim Ministros quos vocamus nuncios 
(t) Lact. l. 1. c. 7. . How far this satisfyeth the objection we have shown before; but certainly it doth sufficiently declare his judgement, that the Angels were created before the World. The old Hermit Cassianus is more plain and positive; and he a Latin writer too, of approved antiquity, Ante conditionem hujus visibilis Creaturae, spiritales coelestesque virtutes Deum fecisse, etc. nemo fidelium est qui dubitat 
(u) Cassian. Collat. 8. c. 7. . That God before the making of this visible World, had made those heavenly and spiritual powers (so he calls the Angels) there is not any of the faithful who so much as doubteth. In which it is to be observed that Cassian doth not only speak this as his own opinion, but the opinion of all Orthodox and faithful Christians; and an opinion grounded on the words of job before remembered, by him alleged and applied for the proof hereof. Finally having cleared the received opinion, from being any way derogatory to the honour of Christ, by whom and for whom all things were created, he doth again repeat what he said before, though he differ somewhat in the words, saying, Ante istud Geneseos temporale principium, omnes illas Potestates Coelestesque virtutes Deum creasse non est dubium. This than was the opinion of the ancient Church, and it stood uncontrolled by any public authority till the Lateran Council, about 30. years ago; in which indeed it was declared, Omnipotenti Dei virtute mundum et Angelos simul ab initio temporis de nihilo esse condita 
(x) Concil. Lateran. l. 1. c. 5. , that by the Almighty God the Angels and the World were both created together in the beginning of time. This was indeed determined then. But I ascribe not so much to the Lateran Council, or the decrees and definitions which were therein made (was not the point of Transubstantiation first established there?) as to recede from the authority of the ancient writers, because Pope Innocent the third did not like their tenets: especially when I have some advantage of the holy Scriptures to rely upon. For when I find that David in marshalling the works of the Creation, puts the Angels first; not only before the Sun and Moon, but before all Heavens 
(y) Psal. 148. ●. ; I cannot think that he observed only the order of dignity, but that he had an eye especially on the order of time. And so the Angels being placed before Heaven, must consequently be created before that beginning 
(z) Gen. 1.1. , in which as Moses tells us, Heaven and Earth were created.  
But whensoever they were made, it is out of question, that they were all created by the word of God: and that they were created both for glory excellent, and for their numbers almost infinite. Lactantius telleth us in general terms, that they were innumerable 
(a) Lact. l. 1. c. 5 ; and so no question but they were. For besides those many thousands which fell from God, (of which we shall speak more anon) the Prophet doth inform us of the heavenly hosts; that thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him 
(b) Dan. 7.10. . Not that he doth intend by this to define their number (as if they were not more in number then are there set down) but to put down such a vast number, Quo majorem multitudinem humanus sermo explicare nequeat 
(c) Hieron. in locum. , saith St. Hierome rightly; greater then which could not be cast up by man's Arithmetic. The several ministries which they undergo, that numberless number of persons whom they do attend on, were proof enough of this, were there no proof else. But because commonly such vast and infinite multitudes are apt to run into confusions, except they be restrained by some rule and order; it pleased God to divide his Angels into several ranks to make them differing in degree; that so there being a subordination in the Heavenly hierarchy, the danger of confusion might be best avoided. Nine different orders there are reckoned of these ministering spirits, the one superior to another; that is to say, Angels, Archangels, Virtues, Powers, Dominations, Principalities, Thrones, Cherubin, and Seraphim: which different names are not only or originally in the works of Dionysius (the Areopagite, as it is most generally supposed) but in the book of God. Of Angels we read often in the holy Scripture; of Archangels, 1 Thess. 4 16. of the Churubims, Gen. 3.24. and of the Seraphims, Isa. 6.2. The rest we find thus mustered in St. Paul's Epistles, first where he telleth us, that God hath set our Saviour Christ at his own right hand, far above all Principality and Power, and Might, (the Latin reads virtutes, Virtues) and Dominions, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but in that to come, Ephes. 1.21. And after where he reckoneth up the orders of the blessed Angels amongst the works of the Creation, saying, that by him (CHRIST) all things were created, that are in Heaven, and that are in Earth, visible and invisible, whether they be Thrones, or Dominions, or Principalities, or Powers, Col. 1.16. Out of which places I collect, First, that these several words are not used by the Apostle to signify the same one thing, but are the several names of some different things; why else should it follow after this recital, Et super omne nomen quod nominatur, and above every name that is named? And secondly, that these several names do serve to signify and distinguish those several orders, into which God hath ranked those Celestial spirits. Of this saith Cassianus briefly, Apostolus per ordinem numerans 
(e) Cassian Collatine 8. c. 7. , that the Apostle marshaled them in their proper order. But Hierom reckoning up the particular orders, doth resolve more fully, Sine causa diversitatem nominum esse ubi non est diversitas meritorum 
(f) Hieron. advers. jovin. l. 2. ; i. e. that there is no reason why there should be such diversities of names, if there were not some diversity also of estates and qualities. And thereupon he doth infer, Archangelum aliorum minorum, etc. that an Archangel must be chief over other Angels, and that the Powers and Dominions must needs have some subordinate unto their command, on whom to exercise that power and dominion which is vested in them 
(g) ●Id. ibid. . Nay he compareth them to an Army (and are they not in plain terms called the Heavenly host, Lu. 2.13.) in which are Generals, Colonels, Captains, & reliquus militiae ordoes, and other officers and Soldiers of inferior note. If any ask how St. Paul came to know the names of these different orders, (and it seems some had asked the question in St. Hieroms time) he answereth, De traditionibus Hebraeorum 
(h) Id. in Eph. 1. , that he had it by tradition from the Hebrew Doctors; and possibly it might be so, considering he was brought up at the feet of Gamaliel, one of the most learned of the Rabbis. But in my mind it might be better answered thus, That St. Paul being rapt up into the third heaven 
(i) 2 Cor. 12.2. , which never any of the holy penmen was but he, had opportunity to see more, and to commit more to writing touching this particular, than any Prophet or Apostle had before or since. More might be said in maintenance of this division of the Angels into several orders, had I or list or leisure to insist upon it: or purposed to make that the principal, which was intended for an Accessary unto this discourse.  
That which I mainly do intend, is to set forth the ministry of these blessed spirits in reference unto the will of God, and the weal of Man. His Ministers they are, Psal. 104. and therefore called ministering spirits, Heb. 1.14. but commonly sent out by Almighty God to minister unto the necessities of poor mortal man, to those especially who shall be heirs of salvation, as St. Paul hath told us. His Ministers they are, and therefore to be used by him as he sees occasion, in his affairs of greatest moment; in none more frequently than such as do relate to the sons of men, either in point of punishment or of preservation; whether it be in reference to their temporal or eternal being. In both respects the Angels are the Ministers of the Court of Heaven, the ordinary officers or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Almighty judge, and bound to execute the mandates which are issued thence, whether men's sins be ripe for vengeance, or that affliction and repentance make them fit for mercy. First in the way of temporal punishment, it is most clear and evident in the book of God, that he sent down his Angels with a full commission to destroy Sodom 
(k) 19.13.  and Gomorrah two rich populous Cities, after they had so long abused his patience, and their own prosperities: and that he sent his evil Angels amongst the Egyptians, when neither signs nor wonders would prevail upon them; 
(l) Psal. 78.49, 50.  by whom he gave their life over unto the pestilence, slew the first born in all their dwellings, and finally overwhelmed them in the red Sea, or Sea of Edom: Where note they are called mali Angeli, or evil Angels, not that they were so in themselves, but ab effectit, from the evils which they brought on that perishing people, as Bellarmine and Lorinus two very learned Jesuits, have right well observed. Thus do we also read of a destroying Angel, by whom according to the will and command of God 
(m) 2 Sam. 24.15. , no fewer than 70000. Israelites were consumed in an instant, when once they boasted in their numbers, and did presume too much on the Arm of flesh: and of another which went out and smote in the Camp of the Assyrians no less than 185000. persons 
(n) 2 King. 19.35. , after they had blasphemed the Lord, and put a scorn upon the holy one of Israel. Not to say any thing of Herod, who when he had beheaded james, imprisoned Peter, and troubled certain of the Church; was miserably smitten by an Angel, and consumed by worms. It pleased GOD to employ them in those acts of vengeance, though well affected in themselves to the good of mankind; and a necessity was laid upon them to obey his pleasure. Nec quicquam est in Angelis, nisi parendi necessitas 
(o) Lact. l. 2.17. , said Lactantius truly. And so far we have all things clear from the holy Scriptures. But if we will believe the learned (as I think we may) there is no signal punishment of ungodly people, ascribed to God in the old Testament, but what was executed by the ministry of these blessed spirits, except some other means and ministers be expressly named. That great and universal deluge in the time of Noah, was questionless the work of Almighty God; I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the Earth, Gen. 6.17. But this was done by the ministry and service of the holy Angels, Ministerio Angelorum, saith Torniellus 
(p) Torniell. in A. M. 1556. : whom he employed in breaking up the fountains of the great deep, and opening the cataracts of Heaven, for the destruction of that wicked unrepenting people. Thus when it is affirmed in the 14. of Exodus that the Lord looked into the host of the Egyptians through the pillar of fire, and overthrew them in the midst of the Sea, v. 24.27. Non intelligendum est de Deo, sed de Angelo qui erat in nube, we must not understand it of the Lord himself, as Tostatus hath it 
(q) Tostat. in Exod. 14. , but only of the Angel or ministering spirit, of whose being in the cloud we had heard before. And when we read that in the battle of the five Kings against the Israelites, the Lord cast down great stones upon them from Heaven, josh. 10. it is not to be thought (saith he) Quod Deus mitteret, 
(r) Id. in Josh. 10. qu. ●.  sed Angelus jubente Deo, that this was done by Gods own hand, but by the holy Angels at the Lords appointment. The like may be affirmed of those other acts of power and punishment, whereof we find such frequent mention in the book of God; which though they be ascribed to God as the principal Agent, yet were they generally effected by his holy Angels, as the means and instruments.  
But the most proper office of the holy Angels, is not for punishment, but preservation; not for correction of the wicked, but for protection of the just and righteous person. That's the chief part of their employment, the office which they most delight in; and God accordingly both hath and doth employ them so from time to time. For by the ministry of his Angels did he deliver Ishmael from the extremity of thirst, Daniel from the fury of hunger, Lot from the fire, and trembling Isaac from the sword: our infant Saviour from one Herod, his chief Apostle from another; all of them from that common prison, into the which they had been cast by the Priests and Pharisees. But these were only personal and particular graces. Look we on such as were more public, on such as did concern his whole people generally: and we shall find an Angel of he Lord encamping between the host of Egypt and the house of Israel 
(s) Ex. 14.19. , to make good the passage at their backs till they were gotten on the other side of the Sea: another Angel marching in the front of their Armies, as soon as they had entered the land of Canaan 
(t) Josh. 5.15 ; and he the Captain of the Lords hosts, Princeps exercituum Dei, as the vulgar readeth it; but whether Michael, Gabriel, or who else it was, the Rabbins may dispute at leisure, and to them I leave it. Moreover, that wall of waters which they had upon each side of them, when they passed thorough the Sea as upon dry ground, facta est a Deo per Angelos exequentes, that was the work of Angels also directed and employed by Almighty God, as the learned Abulensis notets it 
(u) Tostat. in Exod. 14. . Which also is affirmed by the jewish Doctors of the dividing of the waters of jordan, to make the like safe passage for them into the promised land, the land of Canaan 
(x) Id. in Josh. 3. . The like saith Peter Martyr a learned Protestant touching the raising of the Syrians from before Samaria, when the Lord made them hear the noise of Cariots, and the noise of horsemen, that it was, ministerio Angelorum 
(y) Peter Mart. in 2. Reg. 7.6. , effected by the ministry of the holy Angels, whom God employed in saving that distressed people from the hands of their enemies. And by an Angel, or at least an angelical vision, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by a dream or Oracle delivered to them in their sleep, as Eusebius telleth us 
(z) Euseb. Eccl. hist. l. 3.5. , did he forewarn the Christians dwelling in the land of Palestine, to remove thence to Pella, a small town of Syria, and so preserved them from the spoil and fury of the Roman Armies. This was God's way of preservation in the times before us, and it is his way of preservation in all ages since. GOD is the same God now, as then: his holy Angels no less diligent in their attendance on us than they have been formerly. Let us but make ourselves by our faith and piety, worthy to be accounted the Sons of God, and the heirs of salvation: and doubt we not of the assistance of these ministering spirits, in all essays of personal or public dangers. 'tis true the apparitions of the Angels in these late times have been very rare; not many instances to be found in our choicest Histories. But than it is as true withal, one of the most eternal truths of holy Scripture; that the Angel of the Lord, encampeth about all them that fear him, and delivereth them 
(a) Psal. 34.7. . Whether we see, or see them not, it comes all to one; and so resolved by Clemens of Alexandria, an old Christian writer, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(b) Clem. Alex. Stron. l. 6. . The Lord, saith he, doth still preserve us by the ministry of his holy Angels, though we behold them not in any visible shape, as the ancients did.  
And to say truth, this general protection of the Angels is a point so clear, so undeniable in true Divinity, that he must needs renounce the Scripture which makes question of it. Some difference indeed hath been about Angel-gardians, and the particular protection which we have from them to whom God hath committed the tuition of our several persons. And yet even this, if we make Scripture to be judge, according to the exposition of the ancient Writers, will prove a point as clear and as undeniable, as that of the protection which we have in general. For Origen who lived in the third century from our Saviour's birth, reckoneth it for a tenet of undoubted truth, and generally embraced in the Christian Church long before his time; that all God's children from their birth, or at least their Baptism, had their angel-keepers 
(k) Origen. tract. 6. in Mat. . Lactantius speaks more generally as of all mankind, (Ad tutelam generis humani misit Angelos 
(l) Lact. l. 2.15. ) though possibly he might mean no otherwise then did the other Catholic writers of the times he lived in, and those who followed close in the age succeeding. St. Basil in Psal. 33. and Psal. 58. St. Chrysost. on the 18. of Matthew. The Author of the Imperfect work, Hom. 40. Theodoret in l. 5. divinorum Decretorum, do all agree upon this point. But I find none more copious nor more positive in it then St. Hierome, who doth not only say it, but urge Scripture for it. He saith it in the general first, Magna est dignitas animarum, ut unaquaeque habeat ab ortu nativitatis in custodiam suum Angelum delegatum. Great, saith he, is the soul of man, (he means Christian men) that every one from the very birth hath a special Angel appointed for his defence and custody 
(m) Hier. in Mat. 18. . He saith it in particular next, of the Lady Paula, Testor Jesum et sanctos ejus, ipsumque proprium Angelum, qui Custos suit et comes admirabilis foeminoe 
(n) Id. in Epic: Paul. ad Eustoch. : calling to witness CHRIST, and his blessed Saints, yea and the very Angel himself, who was the guardian and companion of that admirable woman. And finally he doth not only say it as a positive truth, but doth refer us to the Scripture for the proof thereof; Quod unusquisque nostrum Angelos habent, multa Scripturae loca docent 
(o) Id. in Isa. 66 . The Scriptures he referreth us to, are chiefly Mat. 18. and Act. 12. That in the 18. of St. Matthew, is this saying of CHRIST, Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones, for I say unto you that in Heaven their Angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven. Touching which text, first it is generally agreed by all sorts of writers, that by the name of Parvuli, he means not little children in age or stature; but rather the just and righteous man: which howsoever he be great in the eye of God, is little in esteem of the wicked World, and less in the opinion which he hath of himself. And secondly, it is as generally agreed on by all ancient writers, that by their Angels are meant those who had the charge or custody of their several persons. The saying of St. Augustine is well known in this, Parum est fecisse Angelos tuos, fecisti et custodes parvulorum tuorum. It did not seem enough to God to have made the Angels, but that he made them also to be guardians of his little ones. The same, or to the same effect say almost all the ancient writers which expound this text. That in the Acts, is the result of a discourse amongst the Disciples about St. Peter, whom they conceived to be in prison. But when a Danosel of the house did affirm for certain, that she left him standing at the door, they then resolved with one consent that it was his Angel, v. 15. that is to say, his angel-keeper, Qui Petro ab ortu nativitatis datus est in custodiam 
(q) Estius in Act. 12. , to whom the safety of his person had been committed from his very birth. St. Hierom, as we saw before, so applieth the text; so doth St. Basil also in his first book against Eunomius, Cassian Collat. 8. c. 17. and divers others of the Ancients. Nor doth this place conclude only for Angel guardians of God's people since the times of the Gospel; but that it was the general opinion of those also who lived under the Law; from whom these Disciples must needs have it. And that it was his angel-keeper of which jacob spoke, saying, The Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless these lads 
(r) Gen. 46.16. ; is the opinion of Tostatus, and many learned men of the Roman Schools. And hitherto I think the point is so clear and evident, that we may safely say with Vasquez, Sine gravi temeritatis nota negare non licet, it cannot be denied without very great rashness: especially considering that this tenet of Angel-gardians, finds testimony also from the pen of Plato, and others of the ancient and more learned Gentiles, but darkened and mistaken by them under the notion of such Daemons whom they blindly worshipped. For Apuleius speaking of two sorts of Daemons, the one superior to the other, then addeth. Ex hac sublimiori Daemonum copia autumat Plato singulis hominibus in vita agenda testes et custodes singulos additos, that out of the highest rank of Daemons, Plato conceived that there was a several guardian to each several man. That Socrates in particular had his Daemonium as they called it, (but his angel-gardian as I take it) was affirmed often by himself, of which I shall speak more anon. But that each man whatsoever he was, should have the like assistance as Socrates had without relation to the piety of his conversation, or the soundness of his judgement in celestial matters; was a mere error of Plato's (were it his originally) and never countenanced by the Church of the Primitive times, which did restrain this privilege unto Gods elect. 'Tis true indeed that our great Masters of the Church of Rome do enlarge it further, and will have every man how wicked and unjust soever, whether he be jew or Gentile, Turk or Infidel, to be provided by the Lord of an Angel-guardian. In which they do not only go beyond the Scripture, but also absolutely desert the Fathers, and more than so, the dictate and determination of Peter Lombard, whose authority they so much stand unto in other cases: For he conceives no otherwise of the point then thus, Vt unusquisque electorum habeat Angelum ad sui protectum adque custodiam specialiter deputatum 
(s) Pet. Lomb. l. 2. dist. 11. , i.e. that every one of the Elect (none else) had their Angel-keepers. And this perhaps might be the reason, why Maldonat, though he follow the general current of their Schools, in giving unto every man his Angel-Guardian: doth yet ingenuously confess, majores esse parvulorum 
(t) Maldon. in Matth. 18. , that the Angels of the little ones of God's dearest children, are greater and of more esteem with Almighty God, than those which are appointed unto other men. Leaving this therefore as a matter of no ground in Scripture, I must confess that I am throughly satisfied in this point touching the Angel-guardians of Gods Elect. Nor can I think it any way derogatory to the mercies of God, or restrictive of them, that every child of God should have one Angel in ordinary to attend upon him: considering it may very well stand (which I marvel Calvin either did not, or would not see) with that protection which God gives us by his Angels generally, in extraordinary exigences and occasions which require their aid. As for the other point which depends on this, viz. whether Communities of people, several States and Kingdoms have not their Angel-Guardians also; I shall not meddle at the present: though there be ground enough for me to build upon out of Dan. 10.20, 21. and the authority of S. Hierom, and some other Ancients, who are plainly for it.  
Suffice it that each Christian man hath his Angel-keeper, appointed by the will and command of God to take the charge and care of his preservation; and to give God account when he shall be called to it, how faithfully he hath performed the trust committed to him. Which as it is a special Act of God's favour to us, so all the honour of it doth belong to him: and to him therefore must we sue and address our prayers, as often as we stand in need of his help and succour, either in stirring up the diligence of our own proper Angels, or sending us such for their succour as the case requireth. The Angels are his Ministers, but not our Masters, our Guardians at the best, but by no means our Patrons. Therefore we must not pray to them in our times of danger, but to God that he would please to send them. Not unto them, because we know no warrant for it in the holy Scripture; nor any means (might it be done without such warrant) to acquaint them ordinarily with our present need, by which they may take notice of our distresses, and come in to help us. 'Tis true, the Daemons or evil Angels in the state of Gentilism were honoured both with Invocation and with Adoration; and the Colossians being newly weaned from their Idolatries, thought it no great impiety to change the subject, and to transfer that honour on the Angels of light, which formerly they had conferred on the Angels of darkness. But doth St. Paul allow of this? No, he blames them for it. Let no man saith he, beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility, and worshipping of Angels 
(x) Col. 2.18. . Not in a voluntary humility, as if we thought ourselves unworthy to look up to God, and therefore must employ the Angels for our Mediators. For this was formerly alleged, as it seems by Zonaras, by some weak Christians in the infancy and first days of the Church. Of whom he telleth us that they were verily persuaded, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(y) Zonar. in Can. 35. Conc. Laodic. , that is to say, That we ought not to invocate Christ to help us, or to bring us to God, but to desire that favour of the Angels rather: immediate address to Christ being a thing too high for our great unworthiness. Nor in the worshipping of Angels, which being an effect of their former Gentilism, (Of which consult St. August. Confess. l. 10. cap. 42. De Civit. Dei. l. 8, 9, 10. Theodoret upon the Text, Clemens of Alexandr. Strom. l. 3. & Can. 35. Concil. Laodicensis) was therefore by St. Paul condemned and forbidden as a thing plainly derogatory to the honour of Christ, whom they did hereby rob of the glorious Office of being the Mediator between God and man. 'Tis true that there were some in the Primitive times who were called Angelici, who intermingled the Worship of God with the adoration of Angels, and lived about the end of the second Century. But than it is as true withal, that they were reckoned Heretics for so doing; both by Epiphanius in his Pannaion, and by St. Augustine in his 39 chap. ad quod vult Deum. And not the adoration only, but even the invocation of Angels also (invocation being an act of Divine worship) is by the same Epiphanius condemned for heresy, Haer. 38. where he speaks of it as a thing in usual practice amongst the Heretics called Caini. Nor was this worshipping of Angels condemned only by them, but by all the Fathers of the Council of Laodicea, Canon. 35. nor by them only who were guided by a fallible spirit, nor by St. Paul only, though directed by the Spirit of God, but by the very Angels themselves, who constantly have refused this honour, whensoever by mistake or otherwise it was offered to them. For when Manoah in testimony of his joy and thankfulness would have offered a Kid unto that Angel, which brought him news from Heaven of the birth of his son; the Angel did refuse it, saying, If thou wilt offer a Burnt-offering, thou must offer it unto the Lord 
(z) Judg. 13.16. . By which modest and religious refusal of so great an honour, Manoah knew (as the Text hath it) that he was an Angel. And if we may not offer to them the sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving; then certainly they do as little expect our incense, or the oblation of our prayers. And therefore it was both piously and acutely said by divine St. Augustine, that if we would rightly worship Angels, we must first learn of them that they will not be worshipped 
(c) August. in Psal. 69. . The like we also find in the Revelation. Where when St. john astonished at the sight of the Angel, fell down at his feet to worship him, the Angel did refuse it, saying, See thou do it not 
(d) Apoc. 19.10 & 22.9. , for I am thy fellow-servant, and of thy Brethren. Concerning which we have this memorable passage of the same St. Augustine, Quare honoramus eos, etc. We honour (saith he) the angels with love, not service, neither do we build Temples to their honour; for they will not so be honoured by us, because they know that we ourselves are the Temples of God. And therefore it is rightly written, that a man was forbidden by an Angel that he should not worship him, but one God alone, under whom he was a fellow-servant with him. They then which do invite us to serve and worship them as Gods (and so do all which do invite us to pray unto them) are like to proud men, who would be worshipped if they might: though to say truth to worship such men is less dangerous than to worship Angels 
(e) August. de vera Reli. c. 55. . Finally, he resolves it thus, and with his Resolution I shall close this point, (though much more might be said in the prosecution) Let Religion therefore bind us to one God Omnipotent, because between our minds, or that inward light by which we understand him to be the Father and the truth, there is no creature interposed. Pray to them then we may not, we have no ground for it. But pray to GOD we may to send them to our aid and succour, when the extremity of danger doth invite us to it. And having made our prayers, we may rest assured that God will send them down from his holy hill, from whence comes Salvation, and give them charge to succour us as our need requireth. Calvin himself alloweth of this, and gives it for a Rule or Precept, Vt in periculis constituti a Deo petamus protectionem Angelorum, & confidamus eos ex mandato Dei praesto fore 
(f) Calvin. Institur. . But behold a greater than Calvin here. For our most blessed Mother the Church of England, not only doth allow of so good a rule, but hath reduced his rule to as good a practice. By whom we are taught to pray, in the Collect for St. Michael the Archangels day, that God who hath ordained and constituted the service of all Angels and men in a wonderful order; would mercifully grant that they who always do him service in Heaven, may by his appointment succour and defend us on earth, through JESUS CHRIST our Lord. Amen. Further than this we may not go, without entrenching deeply upon God's Prerogative; which as these blessed spirits expect not from us, so neither will they take it if it should be offered. Non nobis Domine, non nobis, is the Angel's song.  
But so it is not with the Devil, or the Angels of darkness, who do not only accept of those prayers and offerings which are made unto them by that miserable and infatuated people, whom they have captivated in the chains of sin and ignorance; but they look for it at their hands, and threaten most severe punishments if it be neglected. The Devil is still sick of his old disease, of being like to God both in power and greatness. And being still possessed of his old ambition, no marvel if he stand on Temples, Altars, Sacrifices, both upon Invocation and on Adoration, and whatsoever else is requisite to the Worship of God. It was the pride and vanity of this glorious humour, which made them uncapable of long stay in Heaven; and hath since plunged them in the depths of disconsolation. They were at first created by Almighty God in the state of perfection, as were the blessed spirits, who still stand in Grace; endued with a most excellent understanding, and a conformity of will to the Will of God. Good they were made (as all the rest of God's creatures were) but not good unchangeably. That was the privilege and Prerogative of the Lord most high. But made so good, that they were also capable of doing evil, if they would themselves; and put into a power or liberty of condition, either of placing their whole comforts in the service of God, or by falling off from that felicity, to make themselves the authors and the servants of sin. Which power or liberty of their will (call it how you please) some of them did abuse so far unto God's dishonour, that they were presently removed from that glorions dwelling, banished for ever from the presence of Almighty God, and kept in chains of darkness to the day of Judgement. So witnesseth the holy Scripture both old and new. Behold, he put no trust in his servants, and his angels he hath charged with folly 
(f) Job 4.18. , or rather, in his Angels he found wickedness, In Angelis invenit pravitatem, saith the Vulgar Latin. Which though they were the words of Eliphaz the Temanite, a man not altogether Orthodox in points of Divinity; yet that which he intends thereby is countenanced by other passages of Canonical Scriptures. For if by finding wickedness, or folly, in the Angels themselves, be meant no more than this, (as indeed there is not) quod illi a Deo propria voluntate discesserunt, that by the impulsion of their own will they fell off from God, as the learned Estius well obsereth: then doth this Temanite say no more in the Book of job, then what St. Peter and jude have also said in their two Epistles, God spared not the Angels which sinned (as St. Peter hath it) but cast them down to Hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness to be reserved unto judgement 
(g) 2 Pet. 2.4. . St. jude affirms the very same, The Angels (saith he) which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness, unto the judgement of the great day 
(h) Judas v. 6. . By both it is as clear as day that the Angels sinned, and that the punishment due unto their transgression, was inflicted on them: but what the particular sin was which they did commit, and in what state they stand in regard of the punishment; we shall crave leave to look into with some further search, as being necessary to be known in reference to the fall of man, the incarnation of our Lord and Saviour, and his last coming unto judgement. For being fallen themselves from the love of God, they have practised ever since on Adam and his whole posterity, to make them also liable to the same damnation. In solatium calamitatis suae non desinunt perditi jam perdere, saith Minutius Felix. And this calamity of man induced the ever gracious and most merciful God, to send his only begotten Son into the World 
(i) Gal. 4.4, 5. , to redeem such as were under the law of sin, that so they might receive the adoption of sons.  
First for their sin, the general opinion of the Church hath been, that it was an ambitious pride to be equal with God. For being made by God of so pure a substance, of such an excellent comprehension and so rare abilities, they thought themselves too glorious and sublime an essence to obey a superior; and that it was sufficient honour to the Lord their God, if they admitted him for an equal, and let him be half sharer with them in the Supreme power. Just like some proud ambitious favourite in the Courts of Princes, who being raised from nothing to be next in dignity to their Sovereign Lord, are not content with those preeminences which their King hath given them, but are resolved to strike at all, and either get the Regal Diadem, or perish in the glory of their undertaking. But being this could not be the hope of all those Angels who forsook their God, it is supposed to be the aim of some chief amongst them, of him, who in the Scripture is called sometimes Satan 
(a) Luk. 10.18. , and sometimes Luc●fer 
(b) Esa. 14.12. , and sometimes Beelzebub the Prince of Devils 
(c) Mat. 12.24. . The rest of the apostate Angels were drawn into the plot, either upon a hope of having a supreme Lord of their own nature, which should bear rule over them, or fancying to themselves a more moderate reign, by living under a Prince of their own Election. Now that it was ambition which caused Lucifer's fall, it is expressly said by the Prophet Esay, How art thou fallen from Heaven O Lucifer, son of the morning! How art thou cast down to the ground which didst weaken the Nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend above the height of the Clouds, I will be like the most High 
(d) Esai. 14.12 etc. . Yet shall thou be brought down to Hell, to the sides of the pit. Upon which words S. Hierom giveth us this short Gloss, Qui per superbiam dixerat, In Coelum ascendam, & ero similis altissimo, non solum ad infernum sed ad Inferorum ultimum detrahitur 
(e) Hierom. in locum. . He that said through the pride of his heart, I will ascend above the height of the Heavens, and be like the most High, is not only brought down to Hell, but to the lowest pit of that dreadful Lake. And to this fall of Lucifer, as I conceive, our Saviour doth allude in St. Luke's Gospel, saying, I saw Satan as lightning fall from Heaven, 10.18. Upon which passage take this short note from the pen of Theophylact, Marvel not that the Devils are made subject to you, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, for their Prince is long since fallen from Heaven, and hath no power left: which although mortal men beheld not, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, yet was it visible to me who see things invisible 
(f) Theophyl. in Luc. 10. . The like Ezekiel saith, as of Lucifer's fall, under the name and notion of the King of Tyre. Thus saith the Lord God, Thou hast been in Eden (or Paradise, as the Vulgar reads it) the Garden of God, thou art the anointed Cherub that coverest, thou wast upon the holy Mountain of God, and perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wert created, till iniquity was found in thee. Thy heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness. I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before Kings that they may behold thee 
(g) Ezek. 28.12 etc. . S. Hierom hereupon gives this note or descant, Quo sermone demonstrat nequaquam hominem esse de quo scribitur sed contrariam fortitudinem quae quondam in Paradiso Dei commorata sit. By which, saith he, the Prophet doth demonstrate plainly that he means not this of any man, but of that opposite power the Devil, which had heretofore his abode in Paradise. And as for the iniquity which was found in him, it was that, saith he, quae per superbiam & abusionem potestatis quam acceperat, which lying hidden in his heart, had at the last discovered itself by pride, and the abuse of that power which he had received. These texts not only Cassianus 
(b) Cassian. Collatine 8. c. 8.  and others of the Ancient writers, sed aliorum fere omnium Commentarii de Principe Daemonum exponunt, but generally all Commentators, as Estius telleth us 
(i) Estius in Esai. 14. , expound it of Lucifer or Beelzebub the Prince of Devils. I know indeed that in the literal sense of Scripture those Prophecies were intended of Nabuchadnezzar King of Babylon, and the than King of Tyre whosoever he was. But then I do observe withal, that many things are spoken in the course of those Prophecies, especially the words which I have selected, that cannot possibly be applied in a literal sense to either of the Princes before remembered. And it is a good rule which St. Augustine and others of the Fathers give us in expounding Scrippture, that those places which cannot piously and congruously be understood in the literal or historical sense, ea ad sublimiorem intelligentiam referantur, are to be understood in a mystical meaning; and so the places must be here. But that it was an ambitious pride, which first brought sin into the world, besides these two Prophetical Scriptures, and the general consent of Writers which do so expound them, there are other reasons to evince. For first the Devil, being still tainted with this plague of pride, went the same way to work in seducing Adam. To tempt him with the beauty of a glorious Apple, had been a bait too much below those most rare endowments, wherewith God had invested him at his first Creation. But to inflame him with an hope of being like unto God, to tell him Eritis sicut Dii 
(k) Gen. 3.5. , that there should be no difference between God and him; that was the way most like to take, and that way he went. By that sin which occasioned his own just damnation, was he resolved to draw all mankind into the same perdition with him. And next it is a good rule in Physic, Contraria contrariis expelluntur, that one contrary doth expel and remove another. And this I take to be one chief reason, why our most blessed Lord and Saviour, being God of God, and the very brightness of his Father, did take upon himself the form of a servant 
(l) Phil. 2.7. , and conversed here with man in so great humility; that he might make amends for the sin of pride, by which the Angels who by nature were created Servants, (for what else is a Minister or a Ministering Spirit?) aspired unto the greatness of Almighty God. And unto these I add by way of surplusage, the saying of the son of Syrach, initium peccati omnis superbiam esse 
(m) Ecclus. 10.15. , that pride was the beginning of all sin. And this S. Augustine calls perversam Celsitudinem 
(n) August. de Civit. Dei. l. 14. c. 13. , a perverse ambition, by which forsaking God whom they ought to have loved above all things, they would needs be their own Creators, as it were, out of a self-love to themselves. If it be asked, how Lucifer and the rest of the Apostate Angels, being of such clear and excellent understandings could possibly affect a matter which they knew impossible: Aquinas makes this ready and Scholastical answer, Hujusmodi peccatum non praeexigere ignorantiam, etc. That pride (for of that sin he speaketh) doth not so much presuppose ignorance as inconsideration 
(o) Aquin. part. 1. qu. 63. Art. 1. , Et hoc modo peccavit Angelus convertendo s●. ad proprium bonum, etc. And in this wise (saith he) did the Angel's sin, turning themselves by the abuse of their free will to their own proper good, without consideration of the will of Almighty God. And here I should conclude this point of the sin of the Angels, but that there cometh into my mind the Poetical fiction of the aspiring of the Giants to the Kingdom of God, which certainly was raised on those grounds of Scripture (or the tradition of the jews which was built upon it) wherein these Angels stand accused of the like ambition. Of which Gigantine folly thus we read in Ovid 
(p) Ovid. Met. l. 1. .  
Neve● foret terris securior arduus Aether,  
Affectasse ferunt Regnum coeleste Gigantes,  
Altaque congestos struxisse ad sydera montes.  
Which may be Englished in these words, 
And that the Gods their safety might suspect,  
The Giants did the Heavenly Throne affect.  
Who to attain the height of their design,  
Heap hills on hills, and so to Heaven they climb.   
Next for the punishment of these Angels, though fully denounced against them on the first offence, and in part inflicted at the present; yet the full execution of it was by God deferred until the general day of judgement: that CHRIST might have the honour of their condemnation, and his humility triumph over their ambition. That which was presently inflicted, besides the grief, terror, and torment of that inward confusion which they shall always bear about them, it consisteth first in the diminution of those excellent abilities, with which they were by God endowed in the day of their Creation: the clearness of their understanding being dulled with such clouds of darkness, that though they still exceed in knowledge all the sons of men; yet they fall very short of that which before they had; the Devils not knowing any thing of Christ's incarnation, until it was proclaimed by a voice from Heaven 
(q) Mat. 3.17 & 4.1. ; whereas the good Angels knew him at the very time of his birth, and did not only know him, but adore him also 
(r) Heb. 1.6. . And as their understanding hath lost its brightness, so for their wills, they have not only lost that primitive integrity which at first they had, but are so obstinated in mischief, so settled in their hatred against God and his CHRIST, that they neither can nor will repent, and are therefore called perverse spirits in the holy Scriptures. And for the other part of their punishment which is poena sensus, they are under an arrest already, reserved in chains like prisoners to the day of judgement, and in some part of Hell as their jail or Prison: though many times by the patience and wisdom of God, they are permitted to wander in the air, and compass the earth, that they might tempt the wicked, and try the godly, express their power upon the creatures, and exercise their malice against Gods Elect. That they do compass the earth to seduce poor man, we have it in the book of job 
(t) Job 1.7. , where he is said to go to and fro in the earth, to walk up and down in it: and that he wandereth in the air, we are told by St. Paul 
(u) Ephes. 2. ●▪ , by whom he is called the Prince of the power of the air. But that he was cast down into Hell, besides those places of the Old Testament produced before, we are assured by St. Peter 
(x) 2 Pet. 2.4. ; and that they are reserved there in chains like prisoners, is affirmed expressly by St. jude 
(y) Judas 6. . Not in material chains, we conceive not so: but that they are restrained by the power of God, and are so bridled and tied up by his mighty hand, that they are neither masters of their own abilities, nor have the liberty of acting what they would themselves, but only so far forth as he shall permit, as is most clear and manifest in the case of job. And from thence came, no doubt, this Proverbial speech, that the Devil cannot go beyond his chain. And though they feel some part of that dreadful torment to which they are reserved in the house of darkness, yet is it but initium dolorum, or the beginning of sorrows, compared with those they are to suffer in the world to come. In this regard, the Devils did not only cry out against Christ our Saviour, that he was come to torment them before their ●ime, Mat. 8.29. but they did so abominate the conceit of the bottomeless Pit, that they most earnestly besought him, Ne imperaret ut in Abyssum irent, not to command them down to that deep Abyss, Luk. 8.31. Praesentia Salvatoris est tormentum Daemonum; Our Saviour's presence, saith St. Hierom 
(z) Hieronym in in Matth. 8.  was the Devil's torment, who seeing him upon the earth when they looked not for him, ad judicandos se venisse crederent, conceived that he was come to bring them to judgement.  
And to say truth, it is no marvel that they were so afflicted at the sight of our Saviour, considering that they knew full well, that howsoever he might bring Salvation to the sons of men; yet for themselves, they were uncapable of that mercy, and were to have no part in the World's Redemption. The reasons of which so great difference, as the Schoolmen think, are these especially 
(a) Dr. Field of the church, l. 1. c. 3. . First, because the Angels fell of themselves, but man at the suggestion or persuasion of others, Et levius est alienament peccaffe quam propria, as S. Augustine hath it. 2. The Angels in the height of their pride fought to be like God in Omnipotency, which is an incommunicable property of the Divine Nature, and cannot be imparted unto any other: but man desired to be like him only in Omniscience, or in the general knowledge of things created, which may be communicated to a creature, as to the humane ●oul of Christ. Thirdly, the Angels were immaterial, intellectual Spirits, inhabiting in the presence of God and the light of his countenance, and therefore could not sin by error or misperswasion; but with an high hand and affected malice, which comes nearest to the sin against the holy Ghost, and so irremissible: but man was placed by God in a place remote, left to the frailty of his own will, and wanted many of those opportunities for persisting in Grace, which the others had. Fourthly, because the Angels are not by propagation from one another, but were created all at once, so that of Angels some might fall, and others might stand; and that though many did apostate, yet still innumerable of them held their first estate: but men descend by generation from one stock or root, and therefore the first man falling and corrupting his nature, derived the same corruption upon all his race; so that if God had not appointed a Redemption for man, he had utterly lost one of the most excellent creatures that ever he made. Fiftly, the Angels have the fullness of intellectual light, and when they take view of any thing they see all which doth pertain unto it, and thereupon go on with such resolution, that they neither alter nor repent: but man who findeth one thing after another, and one thing out of another, dislikes upon consideration what before he liked, and so reputes him of the evil which he had committed. Sixthly, because there is a time prefixed both to men and Angels, after which there is no possibility of bettering their estate, and altering their condition whether good or bad: which is the hour of death in man, and unto Angels was the first deliberate action either good or evil, after which declaration of themselves, unto them that fell, there was no hope of grace or of restitution. For hoc est Angelis Casus quod hominibus mors; that which in man is death, was this fall to the Angels, as most truly Damascene 
(b) Damasc. de fide Orth. l. 2. c. 4. . Finally, the Angels had all advantages of nature, condition, place, abilities, and were most readily prepared and fitted for their immediate and everlasting glorification: whereas man was to pass through many uncertainties to tarry a long life here in this present World, and after to expect till the general Judgement, before he was to be admitted to eternal Glories. In some or all of these respects, Christ did not take upon him the nature of Angels 
(c) Heb. 2.16. , nor effect any thing at all towards their Redemption, but he took on him the seed of Abraham, that so the heirs of Abraham's faith might be made heirs also of the Promises of eternal life. So that these Angels being desperate of their own Salvation, and stomaching that a creature made of dust and ashes should be adopted to those glories from which they fell, have laboured ever since to seduce poor man to the like apostasy, and plunge him in the gulf of the same perdition. Et solatium perditionis suae perdendis Hominibus operantur 
(d) Lactant. l. 2.15. , saith Lactantius truly.  
This to effect, as the same Lactantius there affirmeth, per totam terram vagantur, they have dispersed themselves over all the World: and as mankind did increase and propagate, so had they still their Instruments and Emissaries to work upon the frailty of that perishing creature, by all means imaginable. The principal and proper Ministry of these evil Angels, (whom we will hereafter call by the name of Devils) is to tempt men to sin; and to this end they improve all their power, and those opportunities which sinful man is apt to give them. And to this trade they fell assoon as the World began; working upon the frailty of Eve by a beautiful fruit, but more by feeding her with a possibility of being made like to God himself; and by her means corrupting the pure soul of Adam to the like transgression. In this regard, from this foul murder perpetrated on the soul of Adam, which he made subject by this means to the death of sin, and consequently to the death of the body also, our Saviour calleth him Homicidam ab initio, a murderer from the beginning, joh. 8.34. And as he did begin, so he hath continued, there being almost no sin committed which he tempts not to. For though it be possible enough that men may sin without the temptation of the Devil, by reason of the infirmity of the flesh, and the concupiscences of several lusts which they bear about them: yet commonly the Devil hath a part in all temptations, and either findeth matter in us to work upon, or stirreth up the dead seeds of sin, which do lie raked up in our hearts like embers, or fire in ashes. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, the●is 
(e) Mat. 15.19. , and the like foul acts, as Christ himself hath told us in S. Matthews Gospel. And every one is tempted, as St. james affirmeth, when he is enticed and drawn aside of his own concupiscence 
(f) Jam. 1.14. . So that the matter of sin lieth within ourselves, the Devil doth but actuate and inform that matter, and reduce the powers thereof into overt act: co-operating to the sin, but causing directly the temptation. Between the temptation of the Devil and the act of sin, there must go a consent of heart, and an inclining of the will to the sin presented; and this is man's own act, who is free to evil, and is not necessitated to consent to the evil motion (the overruling of man's will being God's Prerogative) though possibly he have not present grace enough to foil the temptation. The Devil may present to us such a pleasant object, though under other notions, then that of sin, which he knows like enough to work on our humane frailty, and work upon us as he doth, by all subtle suggestions to consent unto it. And though he cannot force us unto such consent, yet in regard he seldom faileth by his cunning practices of gaining that consent which he cannot force; not only the temptation, but the sin itself is often times ascribed unto him in the holy Scripture. Thus it is said, that Satan provoked David to number Israel, 1 Chron. 21.1. that the Devil put it into the heart of Judas to betray his Master, joh. 13.2. that Satan had filled the heart of Ananias, to lie against the holy Ghost, Act. 5.3. And in the same respects it is, that he is so often called the Tempter, as Matth. 4.3. 1 Thes. 3.5. And the Apostle speaking unto married people, adviseth them not to be long asunder, but to come together again▪ that Satan tempt them not for their incontinency, 1 Cor. 7.5. Upon this diligence of Satan to tempt men to sin, and his well husbanding of all advantages which are presented to him to promote that work: it was not only the opinion of some learned Gentiles, but of some of the ancient Christians also, that every man had his evil Angel, which did continually attend upon him to tempt him to the works of sin, and the deeds of darkness. For the Christians Cassianus telleth us, quod unicuique nostrum duo cohaereant Angeli, i. e. bonus & malus 
(g) Cassian. Collatine 8. cap. 17. , that is to say, that unto every one of us there adheres two Angels, a good and an evil. For the good Angel he brings proof indeed from the holy Scripture; but for the adhaesion of the evil Angel he relieth principally on the Book called Pastor: which always counted an Apocryphal book in the judgement of the Catholic Church, makes me suspect the Tenet for Apocryphal also. And yet some think that St. Paul doth allude unto this opinion, where he telleth us of an Angelus Satanae that lay heavy on him, a messenger of Satan (as our English reads it) which was given to buffet him. But for the Gentiles it is clear that they so opined: Lactantius reporting it as their opinion, quod singulis hominibus adhaereant 
(h) Lactant. l. 12.15. , that every one had his Daemon or his evil Angel attending on him, whom they▪ worshipped by the name of their proper Genii. And for his general affirmation I consent unto him. In his particular proof I must needs descent. For amongst others of his proofs he hath that of Socrates, qui circa se assiduum Daemona joquebatur, qui sibi puero adhaesisset, cujus arbitrio & nutu vitae 〈◊〉 regere●ur; who used to speak of a certain Daemon who was always about him, and had accompanied him from his childhood, by whose direction and appointment his whole life was ordered. The same Tertullian telleth us of him, Apologet. c. 37. and Minutius Felix in his Dialogue. But notwithstanding the authority of these learned men, I rather think that this Angel whom they call Daemonium was his Angel-Guardian, than any of the damned and malignant crew, such as were properly called Daemons: the life of Socrates being too full of moral virtue, to be directed by the counsels of an evil Angel. For though I cannot grant, as before I said, that every man, how wicked and unjust soever, whether he be jew or Gentile, Turk or Infidel, hath his Angel-Guardian; which is the now received opinion of the Roman Schools: yet that few selected ones among the Gentiles, such as Socrates was, who led their lives according to the Rules of Virtue, and died as he did in defence of the only God against those many Idols which the Heathen worshipped, might by God's special grace have their Angel-Guardians; I am not willing to deny.  
And now I am fallen upon these Daemons, I must take notice of another of the Devils practices, which did as much promote his Kingdom of darkness, as any temptation unto sin, of what kind soever: I mean the raising of these Daemons into the rank and reputation of Celestial Deities, and speaking by them in the mouths of the Heathen Oracles. For by this means they gained on earth, what they lost in Heaven: and though they could not make themselves equal to God in power and greatness, while they continued in the Heavens; yet they found ways to be adored as God, by poor ignorant people, whose souls they had seduced to that wretched blindeness. Of these Lactantius telleth us that they were called Daemons, i. e, peritos & rerum scios 
(i) Lactant. l. 12.15. , from their general knowledge, which the word Daemon doth import in the Greek Original; that they had a Sovereign Prince amongst them, whom they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or the Prince of Devils; that counterfeiting first the persons of deceased Kings, they aim to be worshipped in their statuas, and became so impudent at last, Vt Dei nomen sibi, & deorum cultum vendicabant 
(k) Id. cap. 17. , that they challenged to themselves the name of God, and the divine worship which of right did belong unto it. And to train up the people in this blind Idolatry, having first taught them to adore the images of some famous men, whom they had caused to be entitled by the name of Deities, sub statuis & imaginibus consecratis delitescunt, they shrouded themselves within their consecrated shrines and Images, and from thence gave out Oracles touching things to come; and sometimes so possessed the breasts of their Priests and Votaries, that they did seem to be inspired with the Spirit of prophecy, as Minutius Felix 
(l) Minut. Fel.  well observeth. Nay being spirits as they are, of an excellent knowledge, and either by a foresight which they have of some things in future, or by conjecturing at events out of natural causes; or coming by some other means to be made acquainted with the will of God: they took upon them to effect what they knew would follow, and to be the Authors of those public blessings which were hard at hand: so that indeed it was no wonder, Si sibi Templa, si honores, si sacrificia tribuuntur 
(m) Lactant. l. 2.17. , if thereupon the people would erect them Temples, and offer sacrifice unto them, and yield them other Divine honours fit for none but Gods. By means whereof they did not only raise themselves into the Throne and Majesty of Almighty God, and captivated almost all the world in a blind obedience to their will and commands: Sed veri ac singularis Dei notitiam apud omnes gentes inveteraverunt, as the same Lactantius rightly noteth, but in a manner had defaced the knowledge of the true one and only God over all the earth. And in this blindeness and Idolatry did the world continue till the birth of CHRIST: the Idols of Egypt falling down flat before him, when he was carried into that country in his Mother's arms, as Palladius telleth us 
(n) Palladius in hist. Lansiac. ; and all the Oracles of the Gentiles failing at the time of his death, as is collected out of that work of Plutarch's inscribed De defectu Oraculorum. Which preparation notwithstanding, these Devils or Daemons, call them which you will, had gotten such possession of the minds of men, that the Apostles and Evangelists found it a far easier matter to cast the Devils out of their bodies, than out of their souls: and long it was before the rising of the Sun of righteousness was able to dispel those thick clouds of darkness wherewith they had thus overspread the whole face of the Earth. Which with their power and influence in the acts of sin, occasioned the Apostle to make this expression, that he wrestled not against flesh and blood, but against Principalities and Powers, against the Rulers (not of this world, but) of the darkness of this world, and against spiritual wickednesses in high places 
(o) Ephes. 6.12. . By which words as he means the Devils and infernal spirits, against which the man of God is to combat daily, so by those words he gives me a just ground to think, that the Angels which did fall from the primitive purity, and have since laboured noithing more than the ruin of man; were chiefly of those Orders of Angels, which are called Principalities and Powers in the holy Scriptures. And this I am the rather induced to think, because I find them called by those names in another place, where the Apostle speaking of Christ's victory over Hell and Satan, describes it thus, that having spoiled Principalities and Powers, he made a show of them openly and triumphed over them. But of this argument enough. It is now time that we proceed to the Creation and fall of man as that which more immediately conduceth to the following Articles of the Incarnation, death and passion of our Lord and Saviour.  
And first for man's Creation, it was last in order, though first in God's intention of the six days work: it being thought unfit in Gods heavenly wisdom to create man into the world, before he was provided of a decent house, and whatsoever else was necessary both for life and comfort. For it we look unto the end for which God made many of the inferior creatures, reper●●mus eum non necessitati modo, sed & oblectamento voluisse consulere 
(p) Calvin. Institut. , as Calvin rightly hath observed, we shall find that he not only intended them for the necessities of man's life, but also for the convenience and delight in living. And whereas all the rest of the six days work, were the acts only of his power, the creating of man doth seem to be an act both of power and wisdom. In all the rest, there was nothing but a Dixit Deus 
(q) Gen. 1. , he spoke the word and they were made 
(r) Psal. 148 ●.  saith the Royal Psalmist. But in the making of man there was somewhat more, a Faciamus hominem, a consultation called about it; each Person of the Trinity did deliberate on it, and every one contributed somewhat to his composition. For God the Father, as the chief workman, or the principal agent, gave him form and feature in which he did imprint his own heavenly Image: The Son, who is the living and eternal Word, gave him voice or speech, that so he might be able to set forth God's praises; and the holy Ghost, the Lord and giver of life, as the Nicene Fathers truly call him, did breath into his nostrils the breath of life. Or if we look upon it, as one act of all, we shall find man agreeing with many of the creatures in the matter out of which he was made, but very different from them all both in form and figure. For though God pleased to make him of the dust of Earth, to humble him and keep him from aspiring thoughts, as oft as he reflected on his first Original: yet did he make him of a strait and erected structure, advanced his head up towards the Firmament, and therein gave him the pre-eminence over all creatures else, which had been made before of the same materials. And this is that which Ovid the Poet thus expresseth 
(s) Ovid. Met. l. 1. , 
Pronaque cum spectant animalia caetera terram,  
Os homini sublime dedit, coelumque videre  
jussit, & erectos ad sydera tollere vultus.  That is to say, 
And where all Creatures else with down cast eye  
Look towards th' Earth, he raised man's Head on high,  
And with a lofty look did him endue,  
That so he might with ease Heavens glories view.  A thing of principal moment, if considered rightly, not only to the being, but well being of man; who is hereby instructed by the Lord his God, that in the settling of his desires and affections he should take counsel of his making; so to advance his meditations as God doth his head: and not by fastening both his looks and thoughts on the things below him, to disgrace as much as in him is, the dignity of his creation, and consequently merit to have had the countenance even of those very beasts whose mind he carrieth. For I am verily persuaded, that if the worldly minded man, and such as are not well instructed in the things of God, did but consider of the figure of his body only; that very contemplation would promote him in the way of godliness, and rectify such errors and misperswasion wherewith his soul hath been misguided in the way of truth. Certain I am that Lactantius, whom I have so often cited in this present work, examining the Original and growth of Atheism, with which the world had been infected in the former times, makes this amongst some other causes to be one of the principal; that men had formerly neglected to look up towards heaven. Desierunt homines vultus suos in coelum tollere 
(t) Lactant. l. . And thereupon it followed, as perhaps it did, that being once besotted with earthly pleasures, they came in time to be infected with gross and earthly superstitions. And no less sure I am that on this Contemplation, Anaxagoras a wise man amongst the Gentiles, being demanded for what cause he thought he was born; made an answer, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to behold the Firmament 
(u) Diog. Laert. in Anaxag. . So right a use did the Philosopher make of his bodily structure, as to conceive the World and the pleasures of it, to be so unfit an Object for his mind, that it was not worthy of his eye.  
Next for the form or soul of man, it differeth more from that of all living Creatures, than he doth differ from them in his bodily figure. For whereas the soul of all other living creatures, did rise out of the matter out of which they were made: the soul of man had a more excellent, sublime, and divine original, and was not either made with the body, or out of the same dust whereof the body was made; but infused immediately by God, after the body was first framed, and organised in every part to receive the same. Of other animals, it is said, that God made the beast after his kind, and the cattle after their kind 
(x) Gen. 1.25. ; that is to say, matter and form at once, without any distinction. But when he cometh to the creation of man, it is first said that God form man of the dust of the ground; and after, that he breathed into his nostrils the breath of life 
(y) Gen. 2.7. , whereby he became a living soul. And though I will not enter here upon that dispute, whether the rational soul of man be a thing ex traduce, whether begotten by his Parents, or infused by God: yet I confess, that the very order which God used in man's creation, is of itself sufficient to make clear that point, and to evince thus much, that the soul of man is of a more noble extraction than the souls of beasts; and not as theirs, potentially in the seed of their generation. Or if this be not sufficient to evince it, than I conceive that he that was the best Divine and the greatest Philosopher of any of the sons of men, even Solomon and all his wisdom, hath so determined of the point as to make all sure: affirming that the bodies of men being generated of gross and earthly matter are in the end dissolved into that dust out of which they were primitively made, but that the soul returneth into the hands of God, by whom at first it was inspired 
(z) Eccl. 12.7. . Then (saith he) i. e. at the time of our death, the dust shall return to the earth, as it was, and the Spirit shall return to him that gave it. A Text so clear and evident to the point in hand, that he who writ the Pamphlet called Man's mortality, printed 1643. did very well and wisely to pass it over, and not to put it in the number of those Objections which might be made against him from the word of God; as being utterly destructive of that monstrous Paradox which he takes upon him to defend for true Catholic doctrine. And if the Fathers may be suffered to come in for seconds, where the authority of Scripture is so plain and pregnant; we have a cloud of witnesses of unquestionable credit to confirm the same. For the Greek writers first, it is said by Clemens Alexandrinus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
(a) Clem. Alex. Strom. l. 6.  that the principal faculties of the soul, by which we have rational discourse, is not engendered by projection of humane seed. Theodoret doth not only say as much as he, but brings good proof for it from the word of God. The Church (saith he) believing the divine Scriptures, teacheth us that the soul was (and is) created as well as the body; not having any cause of its creation from natural seed, but from the will of the Creator, after the body of man had been perfectly made. For the divine Moses writeth that Adam's body was first made, and afterwards his soul was inspired into him; and also telleth us in the Law, that the body was first made, than the soul infused 
(b) Theod. divin. Decret. l. 5. . The same he also proveth from a text in job, and so concludeth, that this confession touching the soul and body of man, the Church had learned from holy Scripture. Next for the Latin Fathers, it is said by Hilary, 
(c) Hilar. de Trinitate. l. 10.  Animam nunquam ab homine gignentium originibus praeberi; that the soul never cometh from the generation of men: by Ambrose 
(d) Ambros. de Noah, et Arca. c. 4. , Ex nullo homine generantur Animae, that the souls are not generated by the seed of man: by Leo 
(e) Leo Epi. 93. ad Taribium. c. 10. , that the Catholic Church doth truly teach, that the souls of men were not, (or had not any being at all) before they were inspired into their bodies; Nec ab alio incorporentur, nisi ab opifice Deo, neither are incorporated with the body, but by God alone. St. Hierome glozing on those words of Solomon before produced, thus declareth himself, 
(f) Hieron. in Eccles. c. 12.  Ex quo satis rid●ndi sunt, qui putant animas a corporibus seri, et non a Deo sed a Corporum parentibus generari. Cum enim caro revertatur in terram, et Spiritus redeat ad Deum qui dedit illum, manif●stum est Deum patrem Animarum esse, non homines. I have laid down his words at large, because they are a full and perfect exposition of that Text of solomon's, on which I principally ground myself for Catholic doctrine, though there be divers other places one might build upon. But for S. Hieromes words they are thus in English, How worthily (saith he) are they to be derided, who think the soul to be sown together with the body (in the Mother's womb) and to be generated by our Parents, not to come from God? For being it is said (by Solomon) that the flesh returneth to the earth, and the Spirit unto him that gave it; it is most manifest, that God is the Father of our souls, not man. 'tis true, Ruffinus made some scruple whether the soul did come by propagation from Man, or infusion from God: by which as he gave very great scandal to all Christian people 
(g) Id. in Apol. advers. Ruffin. , so was he very sufficiently scorned and confuted by S. Hierome for it. 'tis true, Tertullian sometime thought as this Pamphetler doth, that the soul either was a kind of body, or was ex traduce, that is to say, derived and propagated by traduction of humane seed: but than it is as true withal, that for this and other of his Heterodox tenets 
(h) August. de haeres. in Tertul. , he is put into the Catalogue of Heretics composed by Augustine. And for S. Augustine himself, though to avoid the difficulty which lay hard upon him, touching the manner how the soul cometh to be infected with original sin, made question whether the soul were infused by God, or derived (he knew not how) from the soul of the Parent; yet he rejected the opinion as absurd and gross, that is should be derived from the natural seed of the body; Quo quid perversius dici potest 
(i) Id. Epist. 157. ? then which there could not any thing be said which is more perverse. He that would see the judgement of the Protestant writers, and how they do accord with the holy Scriptures expounded and applied by consent of Fathers; let him consult Calvin, in his Comment on the Hebrews, cap. 12. Bullinger, Decad. 4. Serm. 10. Beza in lib. quaestion. et Respons. Zanchius de operib. dei, part. 3. l. 2. cap. 4. and Vrsin Tract. Theolog. de peccato. And for the opinion in this point of the old Philosophers, that received maxim of theirs, Creando infunditur, & infundendo creature, sufficiently declares it without further search. But see how I am carried into this dispute, ere I was aware; besides my first meaning I am sure, though not impertinently to the business of man's creation; which is the work I have in hand.  
For the accomplishing of which work (being indeed the Masterpiece of the whole Creation) God did not only form the body, and infuse the soul; but he imprinted in him the impress or character of his Heavenly image. For it is said of man, that God created him in his own image 
(k) Gen. 1.27 : (and that again repeated for our more assurance) in the image of God created he him, Gen. 1.27. About this Image of God thus imprinted in him, there hath been much debate amongst learned men, some placing it in Man himself, others in somewhat adventitious and extrinsical to him. Of this last sort are they who place this Image of God in that dominion which God gave him over all the Creatures. For so it follows in the Text, Let us make Man in our image, after our likeness, and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowls of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth 
(l) Gen. 1.26. . And unto this the Poet doth allude in his Metamorphosis, saying, Sanctius his, et quod dominari in caetera posset, natus homo est 
(m) Ovid Met. l. 1. , that man who was to have dominion over all the rest of the Creatures, was not made till the last. But this, if I conceive it rightly, is rather a communication of some part of his Power, than an impression of his Image; unless perhaps their meaning be, that God imprinted so much of his Heavenly Image in the face of man, as to make all other Creatures stand in awe to him. And if their meaning be no more, than they come up to those of the other opinion, who place this image of God in Man himself, in something which is natural and essential to him, which must either be in his body, or his soul, or both. In one of those it must be, there's no doubt of that; and little doubt in which of the two to find it. For certainly they look for it in a very wrong place, who expect to find it in man's body, though of a gallant composition and erected structure. The Heathen Orator was able to inform some erroneous Christians, one of whose many divine dictates this is said to be, Ad divinam imaginem propius accedit humana virtus quam figura 
(a) Cicero de Nat. Deorum. , that man approached more near to the image of God, in the virtues of his mind, than the figure of his body. I know a great dispute hath been also raised about this image of God in the soul of man, that is to say, in what it specially did consist, and whether it were lost or not in the fall of Adam. For stating of this controversy, we will take some hints from the decisions of Aquinas, who first declares that the image of God consisteth in that eminent perfection which is found in men, expressing the nature of God in an higher degree, than the chief excellencies found in all other creatures; and secondly that this perfection is principally to be had in the soul of man 
(b) Aquin. 1. pt. qu. 93. Art. 4. . Then he distinguisheth this perfection into these three conditions, Creationis, Recreationis, et Similitudinis, that is to say, of nature, grace and endless glory: of which the first is to be found in all men, and can never be lost; the second is the portion of the man regenerated; and the third is the reward of a soul in bliss. The first consisteth in the largeness of the natural faculties of understanding and will, not limited to the apprehension or desire of some certain things only, but extended to all the conditions of being and goodness, whose principal object is God; so that they never rest satisfied with any other thing, but the seeing and enjoying of his blessed vision. And this is that which is more briefly couched in those words of Augustine's, Fecisti nos ad te, et irrequietum est cor nostrum donec requiescat in te 
(c) August. Confess. l. 1. . O Lord, saith he, thou madest us only for thy self, and our hearts are restless and unquiet till they rest in thee. The second kind of this perfection in which the image of God is said to consist, is supernatural, when the soul actually, or at lest habitually, knoweth and loveth God aright, though not so perfectly as he may, and shall be known and loved hereafter. And such was that perfection of the great Apostle, who reckoned all but as dung so he might gain CHRIST; who was so far inflamed with a strong desire of being united unto God, that he desired to be dissolved, without longer stay: and such was the perfection of the holy Father, who thought himself dead when he was alive, out of a zeal of seeing the most blessed face of Almighty God: Moriar ne moriar ut faciem tuam videam 
(e) August. Confess. l. 1. c. 5. ; he died because he could not die to behold that vision. The third and last degree of the said perfection is when the soul both knows and loves the Lord her God in the fullness of happiness. And this is that whereof St. Paul hath told us, saying, that now we see darkly as thorough a glass, but then we shall see face to face 
(f) 1 Cor. 13.12. . Now know I but in part (saith he) but then shall I know even as I also am known. These are the several perfections or degrees thereof, in which Gods image printed in the soul of man doth consist especially, according to the doctrine of the Roman Schools, and most pure antiquity: and of these three the second is that only which was lost in Adam, but partly though imperfectly renewed in the state of grace; there being no man since the fall, who either doth so perfectly know, or so sincerely cherish the love of God in his soul, as Adam did before it, in his first integrity.  
For when the Lord made Man in his first Creation, he gave him such a clearness of understanding, as was not darkened either with the clouds of error or the mists of ignorance; and such a rectitude in his will, as was not biased unto evil by corrupt affections. Perfectly good God made him, but not good unchangeably: for he was left in the counsel of his own hands 
(g) Wisd. 15.14.  as the wiseman hath it, that if he would he might continue in God's grace and favour, and attain all the blessedness which he could desire; or otherwise might fall from both, and so deprive himself of that sweet contentment, which is not any where to be found but in God alone. A greater liberty than this, he had not given unto the Angels a more glorious creature. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, saith justin Martyr 
(h) Iust. Mart. Apol. 1. . And he, as some of them before, abused this liberty so given to his own destruction. For being placed by God in the garden of Eden, in Paradiso voluptatis, as the vulgar reads it; he had free power to eat of every tree but one, in that glorious place: and that tree only interdicted, that God might have some trial of his free obedience, the interdiction being seconded with this commination, that whensoever he did eat of it, he should surely die. What less could God have laid upon him, unless he had discharged him of all obedience to his will and pleasure; and left him independent of his supreme Power? Father (said the wise servant unto Naaman) if the Prophet had commanded thee a great thing wouldst thou not have done it? how much more then, when all he saith unto thee is no more than this, that thou shouldest wash and be clean 
(i) 2 King. 5.3. ? Had God commanded Adam some impossible matter, he might have been excused from the undertaking, because it was a matter of impossibility. Or had God bound him to the fruit of one tree alone, and debarred him from the taste of all the rest, he might have had some more excusable pretence for his flying out, and giving satisfaction to a straitened appetite. But the commandment being small makes his fault the greater; the easiness of the one much aggravating the offence of the other. For so it was, that either out of unbelief, as if God did not mean to sue him for so small a trespass, or that he had a proud ambition to be like to God, or yielded to the lusts of intemperate appetite; or that he was not willing to offend his wife, by whom he was invited to that deadly banquet: he took the forbidden fruit into his mouth, and greedily devoured his own destruction, and so destroyed himself and his race for ever. Not himself only, but his race, even his whole posterity. For being the root and stock of mankind in general, which is descended from the loins of this wretched man: what he received of God in his first creation, he received both for himself, and them who descended from him; and what he lost, he lost like an unthrifty Father, for the child unborn. And as the Scriptures say of Levi, that he paid tithes in Abraham to Melchisedech, because he was in the loins of his father Abraham, when Melchisedech met him 
(k) Heb. 7.9, 10. : so may we say of the posterity of this prodigal father, that they were all undone by his great unthriftiness; because they were all of them in his loins when he lost God's favour; when he drew sin upon them all, and consequently death, the just wages of it. And so saith Gregory Nazianzen, surnamed the Divine, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. 
(l) Nazianz. Orat. 42.  We were so made, saith he, that we might be happy; and such we were, being made when first placed in Paradise, in which we might have had the fruition of all kinds of happiness, but forfeited the same by our own transgression. If any ask, (St. Augustine makes the question, and the answer too) what death God threatened unto man on his disobedience, whether the death of the body or of the soul, or of the wholeman which is called the second death, we must answer, All 
(m) August. de Civit. l. 13. c. 12.15. . For if (saith he) we understand that death only by which the soul is forsaken of God, surely in that all other kind of deaths were meant, which without question were to follow. For in that a disobedient motion rose in the flesh, for which they covered their privy parts, one death was perceived, in which God did forsake the soul. And when the soul forsook the body now corrupted with time, and wasted by the decays of age, another death was found by experience to ensue upon it: that by these two deaths, that first death of the whole man might be accomplished, which the second death at last doth follow, except Man be delivered by the grace of God.  
And by the grace of God was poor man delivered from this body of death. For as there is no deep valley but near so me high hill; so near this vale of misery, this valley of the shadow of death, as the Psalmist calleth it, was an hill of mercy: a remedy proposed in the promised seed, to Adam, and the sons of Adam, if with unfeigned faith they lay hold upon it. God looketh upon them all at once in that woeful plight, and when he saw them in their blood 
(n) Ezek. 16.6. , had compassion on them: and out of his mere love and mercy, without other motives, offered them all deliverance in a Mediator, in the man CHRIST JESUS; and that too on conditions far more easy than that of works: the condition and reward being this in brief, that whosoever did believe in him should not perish but have life everlasting 
(o) Joh. 3.15, 16. . And this I take to be the method of Election unto life eternal, through CHRIST JESUS our Lord. For although there be neither Prius or Posterius in the will of God, who sees all things at once together, and willeth at the first sight without more delay: yet to apply his acts unto our capacities, as were the acts of God in their right production, so were they primitively in his intention. But Creation without peradventure did forego the fall; and the disease or death which ensued upon it, was of necessity to be, before there could a course be taken to prescribe the cure; and the prescribing of the cure must first be finished, before it could be fitted to particular persons. And for the Fall, which was the medium as it were between life and death, the great occasion of man's misery and Gods infinite mercy: God neither did decree it as a means or method, of which he might make use to set forth his power in the immortal misery of a mortal creature; nor did he so much as permit it, in the strict sense of the word, in which it differeth little from a plain command. Quam longe quaeso est a jubente permittens 
(p) Salu. de gubern. l. 8. ? How little differeth permitting from commanding? saith devout Salvian; considering he that which doth permit, having power to hinder, is guilty of the evil which doth follow on it. God did not then permit the fall of unwary man, as Moses did permit the Israelites a bill of divorce, which manner of permission carrieth an allowance with it, or a toleration at the least: but so permit it only, as the father in our Saviour's parable, permitted his younger Son to see strange Countries 
(q) Luk. 15.12, 13. ; and having furnished him with a stock on which to traffic, suffered him to depart, and make up his fortunes, whether good or bad. The ill success that followed the young Prodigals journey, was no part of his father's purpose, of his will and absolute decree much less; no nor so much as to be ascribed unto his permission, which was but causa sine qua non, as the Schools call it, if it were so much. Only it gave the Father such an opportunity, as Adam's fall did GOD in the present case, of entertaining him with joy at his coming home, and killing the fa●ted Calf for his better welcome. 'tis true, that God to whose eternal eye all things are present and fore-seen as if done already, did perfectly foreknow to what unhappy end this poor man would come, how far he would abuse that natural liberty, wherewith he had endowed him at his first Creation. Praescivit peccaturum, sed non praedestinavit ad peccatum 
(r) Fulg. ad Monim. , said Fulgentius truly. And upon this foreknowledge what would follow on it, he did withal provide such a sovereign remedy as should restore collapsed man to his primitive hopes, of living in God's fear, departing hence in his favour, and coming through faith in Christ unto life eternal, if he were not wanting to himself in the Application. For this is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that CHRIST JESUS came into the World to save sinners 
(s) 1 Tim. 1.15. , of whom every man may say as St. Paul once did, that he is the chief. And it is as worthy of acceptance, which came though from the same Spirit, from a worthier person, that God so loved the World (the whole world of mankind) that He sent his only begouten Son into the World, to the intent that whosoever did believe in him, should live though he died, and whosoever liveth and believeth in him should not die for ever 
(t) Joh. 11.25, 26. ; but have (as in another place) everlasting life 
(u) Id. 3.15. . But what it is to believe in him, and what a Christian man is bound to believe of him: as it is all the subject of the six next Articles, so must it be the argument of another book; this touching our belief in God the Father Almighty, Maker of Heaven and Earth, and all things therein, with most of the material points which depend upon it, beginning now to draw to a final period.   

Chap. VI What Faith it was which was required for Justification before, and under the Law. Of the knowledge which the Patriarches and Prophets had touching Christ to come. Touching the Sacrifices of the Jews; the Salvation of the Gentiles; and the Justifying power of Faith.  
ANd yet before we pass to the following Articles, there are some points to be disputed in reference to the several estates of the Church of God, as it stood heretofore under the Law, and since under the Gospel; the influence which Faith had in their justification, and the condition of those people which were Aliens to the law of Moses, before Christ's coming in the flesh. For being that the Patriarches before the time of Moses, and those holy men of God that lived after him till the coming of Christ, had not so clear and explicit a knowledge of the particulars of the Creed which concern our Saviour, or the condition of the holy Catholic Church and the Members of it; as hath been since revealed in the writings of the Evangelists and Apostles: it cannot be supposed that they should have universally the same object of faith which we Christians have, or were bound to believe all those things distinctly touching Christ our Saviour, and the benefits by him redounding to the sons of men, which all Christians must believe if they will be saved. And then considering that there is almost nothing contained in Scripture touching God the Father, his Divine Power and Attributes, the making and government of the World, and all things therein, which was to be believed by those of the line of Abraham, but what hath been avowed and testified by the learned Gentiles: it will not be unworthy of our disquisition to see wherein the differences and advantages lay, which the Patriarches and those of judah had above the Nations; or whether the same light of truth did not shine on both through divers Mediums, for the better fitting and preparing of both people to receive the Gospel. In sifting and discussing of which principal points, we shall consider what it is in faith itself, which is said to justify: of what effect the Sacrifices both before and under the Law were, to the satisfying of God's wrath and expiating of the sins of the people, by whom they were offered to the Lord; and the relation which they had to the death of Christ, the Lamb of God which takes away the sins of the world: and finally what is to be conceived of those eminent men amongst the Gentiles, who not extinguishing that light of nature which was planted in them, but regulating all their actions by the beams thereof, came to be very eminent in all kinds of learning, and in the exercise of justice, Temperance, Mercy, Fortitude, and other Acts of Moral virtue. Some other things will fall in incidently on the by, which need not be presented in this general view. And the mature consideration of all these particulars I have reserved unto this place, that being situate in the midst, between the Faith we have in God the Father Almighty, and the belief required of us in his Son Christ jesus: it may either serve for an Appendix to the former part, or a Preamble to the second; or be in stead of a bond or ligament for knitting all the joints of this body together, in the stronger coherence of discourse.  
And first, Faith being (as appeareth by the definition before delivered) a firm assent to supernatural truths revealed: we cannot but conceive in reason that the Object of it is to be commensurable to the proportion and degree of the Revelation. For as our Saviour said in another case, that to whom much is given, of him the more shall be required 
(a) Luk. 12.48. ; so may we also say in this, that to whom more divine supernatural truths have been revealed, of him there is a greater measure of belief expected. Till the unhappy fall of Adam, there was no faith required but in God alone. For without faith it is impossible to please God 
(b) Heb. 11.6. , saith the Apostle; which Adam by the Law of his Creation was obliged to endeavour. Nor could he come before the Lord, or seek for the continuance of his grace and favours, had he not first been fitted and prepared by faith. For he that cometh unto God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him, as in the same text saith the same Apostle. Which words we may not understand of Faith in Christ, at least not primarily, with respect to Adam, of whom such faith was not required in the state of Innocency; for where there was no sin, there was no need of a Saviour: but only of a faith in Almighty God, the steadfast confession and acknowledgement of whose being and bounty, was to speak properly, the fundamental act and radical qualification of the faith of Adam. But after he had fallen from his first integrity, and that the Lord out of mere pity to his frail & perishing creature, was pleased to promise him some measure of reparation in the woman's seed 
(c) Gen. 3.15. , than did the bruising of the Serpent's head by the seed of the woman become a partial object of the faith of Adam, and of all those who afterwards descended of him in the line of Grace. And yet this was but in a general apprehension of the mercies of God and of his constancy and veracity in fulfilling his word: no distinct Revelation being made till the time of Abraham, so much as from what branch of the root of Adam this promised blessing was to come. A pregnant argument whereof I think is offered to us in the error of our Grandam Eve: who on the birth of Cain, her firstborn but most wicked son, conceived that he should be the man in whom the promise made by God was to be fulfilled: and therefore said, I have gotten a man from the Lord 
(d) Gen. 4.1. , as our English reads it, but rather possedi virum ipsum JEHOVAH, I have gotten a man even the Lord JEHOVAH 
(e) P. Fagius Com. in Gen. 4. , as Paulus Phagius a very learned Hebritian doth correct that reading. And as for Abraham himself, though it pleased God to tell him more particularly than before was intimated, that in his seed should all the families of the Earth be blessed 
(f) Gen. 12.3. : yet so unsatisfied was he as concerning Sarah, or that this general blessing was to come of a son by her, that when GOD promised such a son from that barren womb, by whom she was to be a Mother of Kings and Nations; instead of giving thanks to God he returned this answer, O that Ishmael might live before thee 
(g) Gen. 17.18. . And though upon the duplicate of this gracious promise that in Isaac should his seed be called 
(h) Gen. 21.12. , he was sufficiently instructed, and believed accordingly, that the great mercy which God promised to our Father Adam, was to descend in time from the loins of Isaac: yet that he should be born of an immaculate Virgin, that he should suffer such and so many indignities, and at the last a bitter and most shameful death, by the hands of those, who seemed to boast so much in nothing, as that they were the children of this faithful Abraham: as it was never, that we read of revealed unto him, so have we no reason to believe that it was any part or object of his faith at all. The like may be affirmed in general of the house of Israel, till God was pleased to speak more plainly and significantly to them by the mouth of his Prophets, than he had done unto their Fathers in dreams and visions. For having nothing further revealed unto them touching Christ to come, than what was intimated first in generals to our Father Adam, and more particularly specified to their Father Abraham: the primary and principal Object of their faith was God alone (conceive me still of God the Father Almighty) in whom they looked for the performance of those gracious promises which he had made unto their Fathers: though of the time when, the manner how, and other the material points which the Creed contains, they were utterly ignorant, and consequently could not ground any faith upon them.  
In after times, as GOD imparted clearer light to the house of jacob, (for the nearer we are to the Sunrising, the more day appeareth) so were they bound to give belief to such Revelations (or supernatural truths revealed, call them which you will) which he vouchsafed to make unto them by his holy Prophets. Which howsoever they contained in them a sufficient light to guide them to the knowledge of many particular points and circumstances, which were to be accomplished in the time and place of Christ's Nativity; his course of life, and sufferings, and most shameful death, which every one could see when they came to pass, that whatsoever had been done by, or concerning him, did come to pass according as had been sore-signified in the holy Scriptures: yet this great light of prophecy which did shine amongst them, was but like a Candle in a dark Lantern, or hid under a bushel, and rather served to convince them of incredulity when he was ascended, then to prepare them to receive him when he came unto them. He came unto his own, and his own received him not 
(i) Joh. 1.11. , saith St. john expressly. And for the Prophets themselves, 'tis true that they have in them many positive and plain predictions, of the Incarnation, Nativity, and Circumcision of Christ, of his Passion, Resurrection, and Ascension; as also of the most remarkable passages and occurrences in the whole course of his life. And yet a question hath been made amongst learned men, whether they did always distinctly foresee, or explicitly believe whatsoever they did foretell or foresignify concerning Christ. Nor can I find but that this question is resolved to this effect, that though they had a right apprehension of the truths by them delivered, and a foresight of all those future events of which they prophesied, according to the accomplishment and sense thereof, by themselves intended: yet that this foresight of theirs extended not to all branches of divine truth contained in their writings, or to that use and application which was after made of them by CHRIST himself and his Evangelists and Apostles, with this mark of reference, that such and such things came to pass that the sayings of the Prophets might be fulfilled. For many things are extant in the Prophetical writings, either by way of Typical prefigurations, or positive and plain predictions, appliable to the life and actions of our Lord and Saviour, and the success and fortunes of his holy Church; which in all probability was never so intended by those sacred Penmen. For who can reasonably conceive, that Moses in the story of the commanded offering up of Isaac, the only son of his Father, intended to typify or fore-shadow the real offering up of CHRIST the only begotten Son of God, near the self same place: or that this Ceremony in the ordering of the Paschal Lamb 
(k) Exod. 12.46. , ye shall not break a bone thereof, did look so far (in the first institution of it) as to the not breaking of our Saviour's legs in the time of his passion 
(l) Joh. 19.33.36. : or that the setting up of the Brazen Serpent was by him meant to signify and foreshow the lifting up of the Son of God upon the Cross, to the end, that whosoever believed in him should not perish, but have eternal life 
(m) Joh. 3.14.15. , as himself applies it in St. john? The like may be affirmed of David, to whom the Lord had promised that of the fruit of his body there should one sit upon his Throne for evermore, Psal. 132. that God would set his King upon his holy hill of Zion, Psal. 2. with many other predictions to the same effect. And yet it may be questioned upon very good reason, whether he understood those Prophecies which himself delivered, of a spiritual Kingdom in the souls of men, such as our Saviour Christ erected in his holy Church: in whom the said predictions were accomplished, and of whom intended: and not rather of the flourishing and continuance of his temporal Kingdom; the Royal seat whereof was by him settled on Mount Zion, and the renown of his magnificence and personal valour had made so formidable to the Nations which were round about him. And may it not be questioned also (if not out of question) whether that famous Prophecy, Behold, a Virgin shall conceive, had any reference in the intention of the Prophet Isaiah to the Virgin Mary and the birth of Christ? But of this more hereafter in another place. The like whereof might be made good in most of the rest of the Prophets, if one would put himself to the trouble of searching into all particulars which might be disputed; or rather if our Saviour CHRIST himself had not already put it beyond all disputes: when he thus said to his Disciples, that many Kings and Prophets have desired to see the things which ye see and have not seen them, and to hear those things which ye hear and have not heard them 
(n) Luk. 10.24. ; upon which words we may infer that the Evangelists and Apostles being bound to teach no other things in the Church of CHRIST, than what had been foretold by Moses and the holy Prophets; both knew and taught others also to believe many things of CHRIST, which the Prophets, no not David himself the Kingly Prophet, although they very much desired it, did not see, nor hear of: and therefore that they did not distinctly apprehend the meaning of the holy Ghost in all those things which he was pleased to utter by their mouths, or express by their pens, touching CHRIST to come. For otherwise they must have seen all that the Evangelists saw, and have known all the mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven, which the Apostles after our Saviour's resurrection either knew or taught: which is directly contradictory to our Saviour's words, and to the truth of his assertion: When therefore it is said so often in the holy Gospel that some things were either done or suffered that the sayings of the Prophets might be fulfilled; we must not understand it in that sense alone whereof the Prophets did intend it, or of that natural, proper, and immediate end to which the Prophets did direct it: but of some further mystical or mysterious meaning, reserved in the intention of the holy Ghost; and in the fullness of time accomplished by our Lord and Saviour according unto that intention; though no such meaning was imparted to the Prophets themselves, whose mouths he made the pen of a ready writer.  
But then perhaps, it will be said, that if the Prophets had not a distinct and explicit apprehension of every thing by them delivered in the way of Prophecy, but either knew not what they spoke, or spoke what they did not understand: they differed little, if at all, from the Heathen soothsayers, who foretold many things which did come to pass, but without any apprehension of the truth thereof. For satisfying of which scruple we may please to know, that when the evil spirit did intend to foresignify any thing to come by the mouth of the soothsayers or Diviners amongst the Heathens: he used to cast them into a trance or ecstasy, so that they used to rave, or speak in those sudden fits, that which they neither understood at the time they spoke it, nor could remember when they came to their sense again. These they called Arreptitii in the Latin, as being snatched up as it were from the use of their senses, to move divine and immaterial contemplations: but generally both in Greek and Latin they were called Ecstatici, from the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which Hierome rightly rendereth excessus mentis, an exilience or transport of mind, adding, that he can tell of no other word, by which to express it in the Latin 
(o) Hieron. ad jun. & Fretel. Io. 3. . Aliter enim Latinus sermo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exprimere non potest, nisi mentis excessum. Tertullian doth not only make it a transport of mind, but such as is conjoined with a spice of madness. Extasin dicimus excessum sensus & amentiae instar 
(p) Tertul. lib. de Anima c. 45. . And such an ecstasy he thought had been fallen on Peter 
(q) Id. adv. Marc. l. 4. c. 22. , when saying on the sight of his Masters glorious transfiguration, Bonum est nobis esse hic, that it was good for them to continue there: the Evangelist gives this character or censure of him, Nesciens quid diceret, that he understood not what he said, Luk. 9.33. But this was only a device or conceit of his, being now fallen into the heresy of Montanus to countenance by the like frenzy of St. Peter, the raving follies or plain madness of Maximilla, Prisca, and such other Prophetesses, to whom that wretched and infatuated man had given up himself. Of those, or one of them he telleth us in his Book De Anima, that in those ecstasies which she suffered by the Spirit of God, she had the grace of Prophecy imparted to her 
(r) Id. de Anima cap. 9 . Est hodie soror apud nos Revelationum charismata sortita, quas in Ecclesia inter Dominica solemnia, per Extasin in Spiritu patitur: and this he plainly calleth in another place, Spiritalis extasis, i. e. amentia 
(s) Id. adv. Mar●i. l. 5. c. 8. , a spiritual ecstasy or madness. Whereof he gives this reason in another of his Books against the Marcionites, In spiritu enim homo constitutus, praesertim quum gloriam Dei conspicit, vel quum per ipsum Deus loquitur, necesse est ut excidat sensu, obumbratus scilicet virtute divina 
(t) Id. adv. Marc. l. 4. c. 22. , that is to say, a man being ravished in the Spirit, especially when he beholds the glory of God, (which he took to be S. Peter's case) or when God doth please to speak by him, (which was the case of Prisca and her fellow Prophetesses) must needs be ravished from his senses, being so fully over-shadowed by the Spirit of God. His exposition of the word we allow well of, and doubt not but it was a plain spirit of madness which fell on Maximilla and her fellow Prophetesses as well as on any of the Heathen Soothsayers at the time of their prophesying: whom for this cause the Latins called Furentes, or Furiosos, men besides themselves. Hi sunt & Furentes quos in publicum videtis excurrere; vates & ipsi absque Templo sic insaniunt, sic bacchantur, sic rotantur 
(u) Minut. Fel. in Octavio. , as Minutius hath it. In which we do not only find their name, but those frantic and absurd gesticulations, which they did commonly express in the time of those ecstasies, to signify what an heavy burden of the Spirit did then lie upon them. But so it was not with the Prophets inspired by God, who very well understood what they said and did, and did not only prophesy what should come to pass, but did it in a constant and coherent way of expression, and with a grave and reverend deportment of themselves in the act thereof. St. Hierom who gives us a very good description of these Arreptitious or Ecstatical spirits, affirming of them, Nec tacere nec loqui in sua potestate habent 
(x) Hieron. in Prologue. in Hab. , that they could neither hold their peace, nor speak when they would themselves, but as they were compelled by the evil spirit, hath given a different character of the holy Prophets. Of whom he saith, Intelligit quod videt, nec ut amen loquitur, he understands the Vision which he doth behold, and speaks not like a madman, one besides himself, nor like the raving women of the sect of Montanus. And in another place, Non loquitur in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ut Montanus, etc. sed quod prophetat liber est Visionis intelligentis universa quae loquitur 
(y) Id. in Prologue. ad Nahum. . The Prophet of the Lord (saith he) speaketh not in a trance, or besides himself, as Montanus, Prisca, Maximilla, spread abroad their dotages: but that which he foretelleth is surnamed a Vision, (the Vision of the Prophet Nahum. ch. 1.) because he understands what he doth deliver. The like difference Epiphanius makes betwixt the Prophets of the Lord, and those of Montanus, against whom he purposely disputeth Haeres. 48. And long before them it was said by Lactantius truly, of the Prophets of God whom the Gentiles had been pleased to accuse of madness, and called them Furiosi, as they did their own, that the accomplishment of their predictions, their consonancy or unanimous consent in the things foretold, and the coherency of their words and sentences, did very sufficiently free them from that imputation. Impleta in plerisque quotidie illorum vaticinia videmus, & in unam sententiam congruens divinam, docet non fuisse furiosos 
(z) Lactant. de fals. Rel. l. 1. c. 4. . Quis enim mentis emotae, non modo futura praecinere, sed etiam cohaerentia loqui possit? as he most excellently answereth so foul a calumny. So then the Prophets of the Lord having a true intention to foretell what should come to pass, and being able not to make a good construction of what they spoke, but also to give assurance to the people in the name of God, that every thing should come to pass which they had foretold; were nothing like the Heathen Soothsayers, who used to speak they knew not what in their Divinations. And yet it will not follow upon this distinction, that they did explicitly and distinctly comprehend the fullness of those holy mysteries which the holy Ghost was pleased to make known and foresignify by them: the knowledge of which mysteries, as St. Paul hath told us 
(a) Ephes. 3.4, 5. , was not made known in other Ages to the sons of men, as in his time it was revealed to the holy Apostles and Prophets by the self same Spirit.  
Which being so, and that the knowledge of CHRIST JESUS and him crucified, was not communicated to the jews which lived under the Law, or the Patriarches which did live before it, in so distinct and clear a manner as it hath been since: I dare not confidently say that any explicit faith in the death of CHRIST, was required at their hands as necessary to their justification; or that they actually did believe more in it then Gods general promise, concerning the redemption and salvation of the world by the woman's seed, with some restrictions of that seed to the stock of Abraham, and the house of David, which had not been delivered in the first assurance. Certain I am, that of all the Cloud of witnesses mentioned by St. Paul, amongst all those examples of faith and piety, which he hath laid before us in the 11. to the Hebrews, there is no mention made at all of faith in Christ, nor any word so much as by intimation, that Noah, Abraham, Moses, or the rest there spoken of, did look upon him as an object of their faith, at all. The total and adequate object of their faith, for aught I can find, was only God the Maker of Heaven and Earth: on whose veracity and fidelity in making good his general and particular promise they did so rely, as not to bring the same under any dispute. For what faith else doth any Text of Scripture give to Abel or Enoch, then that they did believe that there was a God, and that he was a rewarder of all those that seek him 
(b) Heb. 11.4, 5, 6. ? What Faith else was it that saved Noah in the midst of the waters, but that he did believe what God said unto him touching his intention of bringing a flood of waters upon the earth to destroy all flesh: and thereupon did build than Ark, as the Lord commanded 
(c) Gen. 6.17, 22. ? Or what else was the faith of Isaac when he blessed jacob and Esau; or of jacob when he blessed the sons of joseph; or of joseph when he gave commandment as concerning his bones, Heb. 11.21, 22, 23. but a reliance on the promise which God made to Abraham, of giving to him and his seed the whole land of Canaan 
(d) Gen. 13.15, 16. ? But because Abraham is proposed in the holy Scripture, as the great example of the righteousness which comes by faith, or of justification by faith, call it which you will, we will consider all those Texts which do look this way, to see what was the object of that faith of Abraham, to which the Scriptures do ascribe his justification. Now the first act of Abraham's faith, which stands commended to us in the Book of God, is the belief he gave to the promise of God, to bless him and make him a great Nation; and his obedience thereupon unto God's command in leaving his own Country and his Father's house, and go unto the land which the Lord should show him 
(e) Gen. 12.1, 2. . Which promise being afterwards confirmed by God, and believed by Abraham, it is thus testified of him in the book of Genesis, that he believed in the Lord, and he (that is to say, the Lord) counted it unto him for righteousness 
(f) Gen. 15.6. . Here than we have the justification of our Father Abraham; ascribed unto his Faith in the Lord JEHOVAH; to faith in God (as the proper and full object of it) as the word is varied by St. Paul, Rom. 4.3. Thus also when the promise was made of the birth of Isaac, without considering of the deadness of Sarahs' womb, or the estate of his own body then as good as dead: he staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief, but faithfully believed that God was able to perform what he pleased to promise 
(g) Rom. 4.19, 20, 21, 22. . And this saith the Apostle was imputed to him for righteousness. Of which of these two acts of faith the Apostle speaketh in the third of the Galatians, where Abraham's faith is imputed to him also for righteousness, it is hard to say: but sure it is, that there is no other faith there mentioned but his Faith in God 
(h) Gal. 3.6. . For it is said, Even as Abraham believed God, etc. And last of all, as to the imputation of his faith for righteousness, when God commanded him to offer up Isaac his only begotten Son, even him of whom it had been said that in Isaac shall thy seed be called: Abraham was ready to obey him upon this belief that God was able to raise him again from death to life, and that God's Word concerning him would not fall to ground 
(i) Heb. 11.17, 18, 19 . What saith St. james to this great trial of the Patriarches faith 
(k) Jam. 2.21. ? Abraham (saith he) believed God, and it was imputed to him for righteousness. In all those Texts where the Apostles speak of his justification, or where the principal acts of his Faith are recited severally; there is no intimation of his Faith in Christ, nothing that seems to look that way, more than that Gods first promise which was made in general to the Woman's seed, may seem to be restrained unto his particularly. Whether these several imputations of the faith of Abraham, do necessarily infer such an access of justification as is defended and maintained in the Schools of Rome; I will not meddle for the present. But in my mind Origen never spoke more pertinently then where he gives this resolution of that doubt (though not then proposed) Quum multae fides Abrahae praecesserint, in hoc nunc universa fides ejus collecta esse videtur, & ita in justitiam ei reputatur 
(l) Origen. in Rom. l. 4. c. 4. . Whereas (saith he) many faiths of Abraham, (that is to say, may acts of Abraham's faith) had gone before; now all his faith was recollected and summed up together, and so accounted unto him for righteousness. And if no other faith but a faith in God without any explicit relation to the death of CHRIST, concurred unto the justification of the faithful Abraham; the like may be concluded of the house of Israel, that they were only bound to believe in God the Father Almighty, till by Christ's coming in the flesh, and suffering death upon the Cross for the sins of man, all that concerns his death and passions, with all the other specialties in the present Creed, made up together with our faith in God the Father, the full and entire object of a Christian faith. For this is life eternal, saith our Lord and Saviour, to know the only true God and Jesus Christ whom he hath sent 
(m) Joh. 17.3. . Not God alone, but God and jesus Christ together, are since the Preaching of the Gospel, made the object of faith. So that it is not now sufficient to believe in God, unless we also do believe in the Son of God, whom God hath set forth to be a Propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins 
(n) Rom. 3.25. , as St. Paul hath told us.  
But here perhaps it will be said, that though we do not read expressly in the holy Scriptures, that the Patriarches before Moses, and the Fathers afterwards did believe in Christ: yet that the same may be inferred by good and undeniable consequence, out of the frequent Sacrifices before the Law, and the Mosaical offerings which continued after it: all which together with the rest of the Levitical Ordinances were but shadows of the things to come, the body being only CHRIST 
(o) Col. 2.17. . That God instructed our first father Adam in the duty of Sacrifice, I shall easily grant: there being such early mention of them in the Book of God in the several and respective offerings of Cain and Abel. And I shall grant as easily, that GOD proposed some other end of them in that institution, then to receive them as a Quitrent from the hands of men, in testimony that they held their estates from him, as the Supreme Landlord: though by Rupertus this be made the chief end thereof, Dignum sane est, ut donis suis honoretur ipse qui dedit 
(p) Rupertus de Operibus S. Trin. , as that Author hath it; which possibly may hold well enough in those kind of Sacrifices which they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, gratulatory, Eucharistical, that is, the Sacrifices of praise and thanksgiving for those signal benefits, which GOD had graciously vouchsafed to bestow upon them. But then there was another sort which they termed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, expiatory, or propitiatory, ordained by God himself as the Types and figures of that one only, real, and propitiatory sacrifice, which was to be performed in the death of CHRIST, who through the eternal Spirit was to offer up himself, once, without spot to God for the redemption of the world 
(q) Heb. 9.14. : yet were they not bare Types and figures, and had no efficacy in themselves, as to the taking away of the filth of sin (for the Apostle doth acknowledge, that the blood of Bulls, and of Goats, and the ashes of an Heifer sprinkling the unclean, did sanctify as to the purifying of the flesh, Heb. 9.13.) but that such efficacy as they had was not natural to them, but either in reference to the Sacrifice to be made of CHRIST, or else extrinsical and affixed by the divine Ordinance and institution of Almighty God. And that they might be so in this last respect there want not very pregnant reasons in the Word of God 
(r) Gen. 2.17. . For whereas God, considered as the Supreme Lawgiver, had imposed a commandment on man under pain of death: although it stood not with his wisdom to reverse the Law, which with such infinite wisdom had been first ordained: yet it seemed very suitable to his grace and goodness to commute the punishment, and satisfy himself with the death of Beasts, offered in sacrifice unto him by that sinful Creature. Which kind of Commutations are not rare in Scripture. It pleased God to impose a command on Abraham, to offer up his only son Isaac for a burnt offering to him upon one of the mountains: and after to dispense with so great a rigour, and in the stead of Isaac to send a Ram 
(s) Gen. 22.2.13. . It pleased God to challenge to himself the first born of every creature, both of man and beast 
(t) Exod. 13.2. ; but so, that he was pleased in the way of exchange, in stead of the first born of the sons of men, to take a Lamb, a pair of Turtle Doves, or two young Pigeons 
(u) Leu. 12.6. . Now that these commutations were allowed of also in the case of punishment, is evident by many Texts of holy Writ. And this not only in sins of ignorance, the Expiation of the which is mentioned, Levit. 5.17, 18. but in those which were committed knowingly, and with an high hand of presumptuous wickedness. Lying and swearing falsely, deceiving our neighbour, and taking away his goods by violence, are sins of high and dangerous nature against both Tables; and therefore in themselves deserved no less punishment then eternal damnation: yet was God pleased to accept of the blood of Rams, in commutation or exchange, for the soul of man. If a soul sin and commit a trespass against the Lord, and lie unto his neighbour in that which was delivered him to keep, or in fellowship, or in a thing taken away by violence, or hath deceived his neighbour, or hath found that which was lost, and lieth concerning it, and sweareth falsely; in all these he doth sin, and that greatly too, there's no question of it 
(x) Leu. 6.2, 3. . And yet of these it is ordained, that having made compensation to his neighbour for the injury done, he shall bring his trespass offering to the Lord, a Ram without blemish out of the flock, And the Priest shall make atonement for him before the Lord, and it shall be forgiven him 
(y) Ibid. v. 5, 6, 7. . In which we find that satisfaction for the wrong in regard of man was to be made by restitution: but the forgiveness of the sin in regard of God, to be procured by the sacrifice of the blood of Rams. But what need search be made into more particulars, when the atonement for their sins, and sanctifying them to the Lord their God, is generally ascribed to the sacrifices and blood of beasts; as if the burden of men's sins had been laid on them. For thus saith God by Moses to the sons of Aaron, Wherefore have ye not eaten the sin-offering in the holy place, seeing it is most holy, and God hath given it you to bear the iniquity of the Congregation, to make atonement for them before the Lord 
(z) Leu. 10.17. ? Thus when he doth restrain that people from eating blood, he gives this reason of the same, because I have given it to you upon the Altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood, that makes an atonement for the soul 
(a) Leu. 17.11. . Thus also saith S. Paul, that both the Book and all the people, the Tabernacle and all the vessels of the Ministry, and almost all things by the Law were purged with blood, and that without shedding of blood there was no remission 
(b) Heb. 9.19, 21, 22. . If without shedding of the blood of beasts there was no remission, then certainly it followeth by St. Paul's illation, that by shedding of their blood there was. Or that the sacrifices both before and under the law, may seem to have the same effect in remission of sins, which is conferred on Baptism in the time of the Gospel: A power not natural to either ex natura sua; for naturally it is as impossible for water, as for the blood of Bulls and Goats to take away sins: but Ex vi divinae institutionis, conferred upon them by the Institution of Almighty God; who being the Physician of the soul of man, might choose what medicines he thought fittest for the Patient's ease. And possibly enough it is, that besides this Expiatory power affixed to these legal Sacrifices, they might occasionally produce repentance in the hearts of the people, when they beheld the innocent dumb beasts brought unto the slaughter; and brought unto the slaughter for no other reason but to make reconciliation for the sin of man. For if a generous young Prince that sees his negligences punished on the back of another, according to the usage of former times, doth thereby both grow more industrious in his course of studies, and more conform and regular in his course of life: why may we not conceive so favourably of the people of Israel, that seeing the brute beasts punished for man's offences, they might repent with shame and sorrow of their former wickednesses, and cry out passionately and afflictedly in the words of DAVID, It is I that have sinned and done wickedly, but what have these sheep done 
(c) 2 Sam. 24.17. , that they should be slaughtered? Me, me, adsum qui feci, in me convertile ferrum 
(d) Virg. Aeneid. lib. 9 ; Let thy hand be against me that have done this wickedness. So that for aught appeareth unto the contrary, the Sacrifices both before and under the Law, had in themselves a power of Propitiation by virtue of the ordinance and justification of Almighty God; and not a relative virtue only in reference to the all-sufficient sacrifice of our Saviour CHRIST.  
But then admitting that those Sacrifices were ordained but as types and figures of that which Christ was in the fullness of time to make for the sins of mankind: yet is this to be understood of God's mind and purpose, and not of any such respect which the people had of them. For that the people when they brought their sacrifices before the Altar, had any such relation to the death of CHRIST, as to conceive the same to be represented in the slaughter of beasts: is no where to be found, I dare boldly say it, in all the Volume and context of the book of God. Or if the people in their sacrifices had respect to CHRIST, or looked upon them but as types and figures of that perfect sacrifice which he was afterwards to offer unto God the Father: think we that God would have rejected or disliked them, profess himself to be full of the burnt offerings of Rams and the fat of fed beasts 
(d) Isa. 1.11. , that he delighted not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs and goats; and more than so, that their sacrifices were become such an abomination to him, that he who sacrificed a lamb was as if he had cut off a dog's neck, and he that sacrificed an Ox as if he had killed a man 
(e) Isa. 66.3. . Assuredly God could not entertain such a vile esteem of the jewish sacrifices, however they might have some mixture of impure affection, had they been offered only in relation to the death of Christ. 
(f) Morn. de verit. Rel. Christ. c. 27.  And though the Lord Du Plessis seem to be of opinion, that the sacrificing of men and women was first taken up, upon some knowledge that the blood of the son of man, would prove a fuller expiation for their sins and wickednesses then of all the sheep upon the hills, and the beasts of the forest; and therefore that their sacrifices did relate to Christ, howsoever horribly mis-applyed in that particular: yet is this only gratis dictum, without proof at all, there being another cause, as bad, of such humane sacrifices, which we shall touch upon hereafter. If it be asked in the mean time, how CHRIST is said in Scripture to be the end of the Law, Rom. 10.4. or how the Law is said to be our Schoolmaster to bring us to Christ, Gal. 3.24. except the sacrifices of the Law were as types and figures of the sacrifice which was made by Christ: I answer, that the Law had other and more proper means to bring men to Christ, then to conduct them by the hand of such types and figures, in case the sacrifices of the jews had been only such. For CHRIST is therefore said to be the end of the Law, for righteousness unto those that believe, (for so it followeth in the Text) because he doth perform that unto those which believe, which the Law propounded for its end, but could not attain, that is to say, the justification of a sinner. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(g) Chrysost. in Rom. Homil. 17. : what did the Law aim at, saith St. chrysostom? to make man righteous, but it could not, because man will not keep the Law. To what end served the feasts, and ordinances, the sacrifices, and the rest of the Mosaical institutes, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but that they might contribute to man's justification? Which when they could not bring to pass, than was CHRIST fain to undertake it, and so became the end of the Law for righteousness. Theophylact following him in this, as in other things. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(h) Theophyl. in Rom. 10. . Christ is the end of the Law, saith he, because the justification of man, which the Law undertook but could not accomplish, was perfected and made good by Christ. And secondly, both Christ may be said to be the end of the Law, and the Law to bring men unto Christ, because, as Musculus well observeth, the Law convincing men of sin, exacting a righteousness of them which it doth not enable them to perform, and again threatening and condemning them for the want thereof, Nihil aliud, agit quam quod ad Christum ducit, per quem justificemur gratis 
(i) Muscul. in Rom. 10. , doth lead them as it were by the hand to Christ, by whose grace they are freely justified. In a word, our Saviour Christ is said to be the end of the Law, and the Law to be a Schoolmaster to bring men to Christ, because the whole Mosaical economy, which in one word is called The Law, was for that end and purpose given unto the jews, that it might instruct them touching the Messiah who was then to come; and that in time they might be trained up and prepared to receive him, and with him that more perfect form of life and worship, which he should establish at his coming. And this is that which was intended by the Writers of the Primitive times, when they tell us that the Law was nothing else but the Gospel masked 
(k) August. de Civit dei. l. 16.26. , the Gospel nothing else but the Law revealed, or the vail taken away from the face of Moses. Such passages in the books of the old Testament which relate to Christ, before his coming in the flesh, were so dark and difficult, that those who were well exercised in the law of God, and made it their study day and night, might very well have asked this question, as the Eunuch did, Of whom I pray thee speaketh the Prophet this, of himself or of some other man 
(l) Act. 25.34. ? But when the Gospel came to be preached and published, and that our Saviour had fulfilled all things which were spoken of him by the Prophets: then was it easy to discern, even by vulgar wits, that the whole doctrine of the Gospel was contained in the Law; and every thing concerning Christ either foreshadowed or foresignifyed in Types and Prophecies. To bring this business to an end, that both the Patriarches and the jews did rely on God for the accomplishment of his promise touching their salvation, I do nothing doubt: there being such evident testimonies of it from the first to the last. I have waited for thy salvation O Lord, saith the Patriarch jacob 
(m) Gen. 49.18. , long before the Law. And almost at the expiration or last breath thereof it is said of Simeon, that he waited for the consolation of Israel 
(n) Luck. 2.25.38. : of Anna the old Prophetess, that she spoke of CHRIST to all them that looked for redemption in Jerusalem, but that they were acquainted with the means and method which God did purpose to make use of in so great a work, or did rely on Christ to come for their justification; as the Scripture no where saith it, for aught I can find, so is there no reason to believe it, for aught I can see.  
What then perhaps will some men say, had the jews no advantages of their neighbouring Nations in matters which pertained to eternal life? Yes certainly, much every way. For to the Israelites (saith St. Paul) pertained the Adoption, and the Glory, and the Covenants, and the giving of the Law, and the service of God, and the Promises 
(o) Rom. 9.4, 5. . Theirs also were the Fathers, and of them according to the flesh was Christ to come. The Psalmist hath contracted these prerogatives of the house of Israel into somewhat a more narrow compass. He showeth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and ordinances unto Israel 
(p) Psal. 147.19, 20. . And then he adds, He hath not dealt so with any Nations, neither have the Heathen knowledge of his laws. Here was Prerogative enough, the communion of his word, the publication of his Law, the Covenant made with those of the seed of Abraham, and thereby their Adoption to eternal life: and most unquestionably true it must be thought, that there was no Nation under heaven to whom the ordinary means of salvation had been offered with so free an hand, as it been to those of judah. But yet the Psalmist doth not say, that God was known only amongst the jews, or that he had not revealed so much of himself unto other Nations, as to let them have a taste of his love and goodness; or that he had not left them any knowledge of his Law at all, for their directions in the way of life and godliness. For first besides the light of nature which is given to every man that comes into the world, and by the which the most barbarous people are instructed, that there is a God: they could not choose but know him in his very works: The heavens declaring the glory of God, and the firmament showing his handiwork 
(q) Psal. 19.1. , as the Psalmist hath it. His power and goodness they had tasted in their several times, in that he gave them rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, and filled their hearts with food and gladness 
(r) Act. 14.17. , as the Apostle pleaded it to them of Lystra. And for the Law the Apostle telleth us this expressly, that the Gentiles which have not the Law, do by nature the things contained in the Law, and having not the Law, are a Law to themselves; which shows the work of the Law written in their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing, or else excusing one another 
(s) Rom. 2.14, 15. . But yet they had not such a knowledge either of God himself, or the Law of God, or any such ordinary outward means to attain the same, as God had given at the same time to the house of Israel. For they not only had the Law in writing, which the Gentiles had not; but they had the writings of the Prophets as a comment on it: and more than so, an ordinance or command from the Lord himself for the public reading of the Law before them, once in every year 
(t) Deut. 31.12, 13. ; that they might hear, and learn, and fear the Lord their God, and observe all the things of the Law to do them. Greater advantages than these could no people have to bring them up in the assurance of eternal life: which if all of them did not attain unto, they had no reason to complain that God had been wanting unto them (for what could he have done to his vineyard which he did not do?) but that they were wanting to themselves, and made no profit by the Talon which the Lord had given them. Reperies eos prius deseruisse quam desertos esse 
(u) Minut. Fel. in Octau. , as in another case, but of the same people, said the Christian Advocate.  
Yet notwithstanding the advantages which this people had, the Gentiles were not left so destitute of all outward means to bring them to the knowledge of God, as to be capable of excuse in their sins and wickedness: though by him suffered, the generality of them at the least, to walk in their own ways 
(u) Act. 14.16. , and fulfil those lusts to which they naturally were addicted. And some there were, who by conforming of their lives to the Law of nature, and cherishing those good motions which they felt within them, attained unto so clear a knowledge of the nature of God, and such an eminent height in all moral virtue: that greater was not be found amongst those of Israel. For what could any jew say more of the nature of God, his divine Attributes, his Power and Providence, the making of all things out of nothing by Gods mighty hand, and the sustaining of the same by his infinite wisdom; then we have formerly declared to have been believed by the most knowing men amongst the Heathens, whom they called Philosophers. Insomuch as we may justly think as Octavius did, Aut nunc Christianos Philosophos esse, aut Philosophos jam tunc fuisse Christianos 
(x) Minut. Fel. in dialogo. ; that in this point, Philosopher and Christian had been terms convertible. Nor did they rest themselves contented with that general knowledge of his eternal Power and Godhead, which they had studied and found out in the book of nature: but they knew also very well, that God was to be worshipped by them in their best devotions. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the first place to worship God, is one of the first counsels in the Grecian Orator 
(y) Isocrat. Orat. ad Demonicum. . And it was Cato's first rule which we learned at School, that God being as he is, a Spirit, is to be worshipped by us with spiritual purity.  
Si Deus est animus, nobis ut carmina dicunt,  
Hic tibi praecipue sit pura ment eolendus.  
Which may be Englished in these words; 
If God, as Poets say, a Spirit be,  
Then with pure mind let him be served by thee.  Which principle of natural piety being planted in them, there is no point of reverence whatsoever it be, either required of, or practised by the people of God, in his outward worship, which was not punctually performed by the ancient Gentiles. Of Solomon it is said in the book of Kings, that when he had made an end of praying all his prayers and supplication to the Lord, he rose from before the Altar of the Lorld, from kneeling on his knees with his hands spread up unto the heavens 
(z) 1 King. 8.54. . Where we find kneeling on the knees, and lifting up of the hands, to be the usual, as indeed the fittest posture, in the act of prayer. Find we not that the Gentiles did observe the same, and went as far as Solomon, if not beyond him? First for the lifting up of hands we find in Homer, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Virgil, Duplices tendens ad sydera palmas; in Ovid, Vtraque Coelo brachia porrexit; and finally, Tendere palmas ad delubra deum, in an old Latin Poet cited by Lactantius 
(a) Lact. l. 2.3. . And as for kneeling on their knees, they so little scrupled it, that they conceived themselves not to do enough in the adoring of their Gods, unless they flung themselves prostrate on the ground before them. Of which Ovid thus speaking of Deucalion and Pyrrha 
(b) Ovid Met. l. 1. : 
Vt Templi tetigere gradus, procumbit uterque  
Pronus humi, gelidoque pavens dedit oscula saxon.   
Which is thus Englished by G. Sandys: 
Then humbly on their faces prostrate laid,  
And kissing the cold stones, with fear thus prayed.  The like may be affirmed of lifting up the eye to the throne of grace, when we petition God for his mercies towards us. Which as it is exemplifyed in that of David, Early in the morning will I direct my prayer to thee, and will look up 
(c) Psal. 5.3. : so do we find it parralleled in that of Virgil 
(d) Virg. Aeneid. l. 2. , Illi ad surgentis conversi limina solis; which if it rather seem to speak of turning to the East in the act of prayer, then of lifting up the eyes to heaven; let us take that of Ovid which is plain enough, where speaking of poor Io and her prayers to jupiter, he saith, that she looked up to Heaven 
(e) Ovid Met. l. 1. ,— tendens ad sydera vultus, when she made her prayers. And lest it should be thought, as perhaps some will be apt to think, that they stood more upon the outward reverence of the body, than the inward purity of the soul, in the act of worship: remember Cato's pura ment, which before we had. And add to that the memorable saying of the wiseman Socrates 
(f) Socr. ap. Plat. l. de votis. , that God regardeth not so much the perfumes which were used in sacrifices, as the souls and virtues of mortal men; or that of Persius one of the Latin Poets, who doth require that in all their addresses to the Gods they should be sure to take along with them, Compositum jus, fasque animi, sanctosque recessus Mentis 
(g) Pers. Sat. 2. , i. e. a soul replenished with righteousness and religious thoughts. Upon which words Lactantius who doth cite them, giveth this gloss or descant 
(h) Lact. l. 6.11. , Sentiebat non carne opus esse ad placandam coelestem Majestatem, sed ment sancta, that he conceived the sanctity of the mind to be more necessary for the appeasing of the Gods, than any service of the body. But being that these applications and addresses howsoever qualifyed, were made to those that were no Gods, they cannot scape the censure which St. Paul gives of them; that knowing God, they worshipped him not as God, but became vain in their imaginations, changing the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man; and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things 
(i) Rom. 1.22.23. .  
The like may also be affirmed of those frequent sacrifices wherewith they sought to expiate their offences, and appease the anger of their Gods. The rites and reason of the which they received from Noah, and not from any diabolical suggestion, as some men conceive; as Noah had them by tradition from the elder Patriarches. For being well enough persuaded that the Gods were much offended at the sins of men, and finding many terrible effects of divine vengeance to pursue them, they could not better study their own indemnity, then to have recourse unto those sacrifices, which had been found effectual in the former times, for the appeasing of God's anger, and expiating those offences which they had committed. Examples of this kind in all ancient Authors Greek and Latin, are obvious to the eye of every reader. 'tis true, the Devil did maliciously pervert this Institution, and caused it in tract of time to be so altered in the object, that in stead of being offered to the God of Heaven, they sacrificed to Idols made of silver and gold, even the work of men's hands: worshipping and serving the creature, more than the Creator 
(k) Rom. 1.25. , (as St. Paul saith of them) whereby the truth of God was changed into a lie; and that which first was instituted for a Propitiation, became to them a manifest occasion of falling into greater and more heinous sin. And it is also true, that the Devil not content with this first imposture, in drawing to himself and his wretched Idols, the honour which was due to GOD: did in short time possess them with this opinion, that if they did desire to make even with God, and offer him such compensation, as might indeed absolve them from all their crimes: they should no longer think to satisfy by the blood of beasts, who in the dignity of their creation sell far short of men, and therefore could not be a sufficient sacrifice to make atonement for their sins. As man had sinned, and by his sins deserved the punishment of death, so was it requisite that by the blood of men they should make atonement, and turn away the anger of the heavenly powers. This was the ground they went upon for those humane sacrifices. Pro vita hominum nisi vita hominum reddatur, non posse deorum immortalium numen placari 
(l) Caesar de Bell. Gallico. , as Caesar telleth us of the Gauls. But the Gauls were not the first authors of this wretched custom. The Canaanites the progeny of accursed Cham, did first give way to those suggestions of the Devil; offering their children unto Moloch (which whether it were Saturn, as the learned think, or some Idol more peculiar to that people, we dispute not now) that by the fruit of their bodies they might satisfy for the sins of their souls. Of these oblations unto Moloch we find much mention in the Scripture, as Levit. 18.20. & 20.2, 3, 4. 1 King. 11.7. and in other places: the Israelites being too apt to adore the Idols of the nations whom they had subdued, and more inclined to this then to any other. From the Phoenicians, or the Canaanites, (for Canaan was accounted for a part of Phoenicia) did the Carthaginians bring this barbarous and inhuman ceremony into afric with them, the Carthaginians being a Phoenician or Tyrian Colony. Of whom the Historian doth inform us, Homines ut victimas immolabant, et impuberes Aris admovebant, pacem Deorum sanguine eorum exposcentes 
(n) Iust. Hist. l. 18. ; that they offered men in sacrifice, and brought young youths unto the Altars, that by their blood they might appease and satisfy the offended Gods. Which as it was their general practice, so at one time, on a particular occasion which Lactantius speaks of it, they sacrificed no fewer than two hundred children of their chief nobility 
(o) Lact. l. 1. c. 21. . The sudden growth and spreading of this damnable custom, he that lists to see, let him consult Lactantius de falsa Rel. l. 1. c. 21. Arnobius adv. Gentes, Tertullian and Minutius Felix, in their Apologeticks. I will no more defile my pen with these Barbarities. Nor had I said so much on this horrid Argument, but only to declare the ground it was built upon: which was not (as we see) in reference to that blessed Sacrifice which Christ was afterwards to make for the sins of mankind, (whereof the Canaanites as they had no notice, so had they took but little consideration) but only thrust upon them by the Devil himself, who thought he could not bind them surer by his own commands, or alienate them more from God then by such Oblations.  
But this was only in some Countries, and to some of their Gods, who were it seems more hard to please then the gentler Deities: not to be charged on all particular men whatever, though possibly some of all sorts of men had been guilty of it. For certainly there were some amongst them, as before was said, who by conforming of their lives to the Law of nature, and cherishing those heavenly motions which they felt within them, not only came unto the knowledge of the nature of God, and did abominate as much as any those inhuman sacrifices, but did attain to such an eminent height of all moral virtues, that greater was not to be found amongst those of Israel. The Justice of Aristides, the magnanimity of Alexander, the temperance of Cato, the fortitude of julius, and the prudence of Augustus Caesar, are not easily paralleled; whether we look into the times before them, or the ages following: not to insist on all particular instances of a virtuous life, which the Heroes of those times have given us in their lives and actions. And this they did not at a venture or by special chance, as a blind man may hit the mark which he doth not aim at: but on such Principles of knowledge, and grounds of wisdom, as brought them to a perfect habit of most virtuous actions. For knowing as they did, that God was infinitely good, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, self-goodness, as they sometimes called him: they could not but conceive withal (as indeed they did) that he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(p) Plato in Phaedonc. , the only profitable good, the most desirable felicity: and therefore that they were not capable of a greater happiness, quam conjungi et assimilari Deo 
(q) Id. ibid. , then to be united with, and made like to GOD, which is (as Plato saith) the height and full accomplishment of all Beatitude. jamblichus, one of Plato's School gives it for a rule, Quicquid faciendum aut non faciendum tibi proponis, ad Divinitatem referri debet 
(r) jamblich. ap. Phil. Morn. ; that whatsoever we propose unto ourselves either to be done, or left undone, is to have reference to the Godhead: our life (saith he) being given us for no other end, quam ut Deum sequamur, then to conform ourselves unto the wisdom and virtue of God. Plotinus, another of Plato's scholars, saith as much as he, first making God to be the supreme end of the life of man: and then inferring thereupon, that he who is possessed of that infinite good, Non tantum conjungitur Deo, sed fit quasi Deus 
(s) Plotin. Enn. 6. l. 9 c. 9.10. , not only is united to God, but in some sort a God himself. Nor was this opinion of the Platonists only, but also of the Peripatetics, of the school of Aristotle. For Aristotle himself rejecting all conceits of man's summum bonum, which some had placed in honours, and some in pleasures, others more probably on spiritual and divine Contemplations: doth for his part affix it wholly to an active life, directed by the rules of virtue 
(t) Arist. Ethic. l. 1. . And Syrianus writing upon Aristotle's Ethics, where this point is handled, saith that the end proposed by men in a virtuous life, is to be reconciled to, and conjoined with God; Vt Deo conjungamur et conciliemur rursus, as my Author hath it. In this the Stoics did agree also with those other Philosophers, as appears by this of Epictetus, Non pudet nos vitam inhonestam ducere, et cedere adversis? Is it not a great shame (saith he) for men to lead a lewd and dishonest life, and to give way to adverse fortune 
(u) Epictet. Artan. ? Why so? Dei agnati sumus, etc. because we are of kin unto God himself; from him we came, and therefore let us do our best to return to him again. Galen for the Physicians, goes as far as any, who telleth us that our soul coming down from Heaven, and being capable of knowledge, doth evermore aspire unto Heaven again, et ad substantiam similem et congenerem sibi 
(x) Gal. lib. de Concept. , to join itself with that di●ine and spiritual essence, which is of the same nature with it. No marvel if men so well principled, and building on so good a Basis (as it seems they did) came to be every way proportionable in their superstructures: and did not only wean themselves from those common vices which had defiled the age they lived in, but also from those vulgar errors and superstitions, which had profaned the worship of immortal God. This last a point in which the wiseman Socrates did proceed so far, that he publicly opposed the Idolatries used amongst the Grecians, endeavouring to reduce them to the service of the only God: and for that cause was sentenced to death by the Judges of Athens, and made the first Martyr, as it were, in the cause of God, amongst the Gentiles. And though the terror of this example did prevail so far, as to affright others from opposing those many Gods, which the people worshipped, it being grown into a Proverb, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that Socrates his cup was ready for them 
(z) Laert. in vita Socrat. : yet did they secretly promote the knowledge of the supreme God, and taught their followers to repose themselves on his goodness only. A pregnant evidence whereof we have in Aristotle, who drawing nigh unto his end, after all his labours, after his toilsome studies in the works of nature, is said to have breathed out his soul with this expression, Ens entium miserere mei, that is to say, Thou being of all being, have mercy on me. Upon which grounds Apuleius either writ or translated a Book entitled, De Daemonio Socratis, or De Deo Socrate: as of late times some of the Divines of Colin did set out a Tract which they inscribed, De salute Aristotelis 
(a) Prid. lect. de Sal. Ethnic. : and some have been so favourable to the Gentiles generally (I mean the Gentiles of those former and heroical times, who did conform their lives to the light of nature) as not to shut them out of the Kingdom of Heaven. Certain I am, that a Franciscan Friar preached to that effect before the Fathers of the Trent Council, without being ever questioned or censured for it: save that upon complaint made by some Protestants who were there attending, he afterwards forbore the Pulpit on pretence of sickness. Et destitit Franciscanus ille praedicare, valeudinem excusans 
(c) Sleidan. Com. An. 1552. , as I find it in Sleidan. And I am no less certain also that Zuinglius, that great Agent in the Reformation, in his Book entitled An Exposition of the Christian faith, dedicated to Christiern King of Denmark, not only placeth Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, together with the rest of the Patriarches and Prophets, in the highest Heavens; but tells the said King Christier● that he shall there find the souls of Theseus, Socrates, Aristides, Nu●a, Camillus, Cato, Scipio, and the rest of those old Heroes, whose virtuous acts are registered in the Ancient Authors, whether Greek or Latin. And of this mind Erasmus also hath declared himself to be in his Preface to the Tusculan Questions, of his setting out.  
I know that in the general esteem of the Ancient Fathers (especially after the rising of the Pelagian Heresies) the greatest virtues of the Heathens were counted but splendida peccata, or illustrious sins; for so I think St. Augustine calls them. The Ancients before Augustine's time were more moderate in it. But after he in his discourses against those Heretics had pronounced this Aphorism, Omnis Infidelium vita peccatum est 
(d) August. cited by Prosp. sem. 106. , that the whole life of Infidels was nothing but sin: it was strait taken up by Prosper 
(l) Prosp. Epist. ad Ruffin. , after him by Beda, and at the last by Peter Lombard, Anselm, and indeed who not, that built on the authority of that reverend man. But then we must observe withal, that as they kept themselves to St. Augustine's Tenet; so did they also build upon his Foundation: and if we seek into the groundwork or foundation which S. Augustine built, it may perchance be found but a mere mistake. For taking for his ground the Apostles words, that without faith it is impossible to please God 
(e) Heb. 11. ●. , and that whatsoever is not of faith is sin 
(f) Rom. 14. ●3. , they first conceive that the Apostle speaketh in both places of faith in Christ, and then conclude that faith in Christ is such a necessary qualification of every good and virtuous action, that every thing we do without it is sin, and consequently must needs be unpleasing to Almighty God. Pope Leo also is of the same opinion, (but whether he took it from St. Augustine or not, I am not able to say) affirming positively, Extra Ecclesiam Catholicam nihil esse castum, nihil integrum, dicente Apostolo, Omne quod non est ex fide est peccatum 
(m) Leo. Serm. 2. de jesu. Pentecost. ; that is to say, that out of the Communion of the Catholic Church, there is nothing either pure or perfect, it being said by the Apostle, that whatsoever is not of faith is sin. This is the ground they build upon. And if the ground be faulty, as I think it is, the building must be very weak which is laid upon it. For first that text of the Apostle in the 14. to the Romans, Whatsoever is not of faith is sin, as it is generally interpreted by most Modern Writers, (and to say truth, the literal sense of holy Scripture, was never so clearly opened as in these our times) relates not unto faith at all, as it is an act whereby we do believe in God, or his Son CHRIST JESUS: but only to that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or firm persuasion, which every one ought to have in his own mind of the lawfulness or unlawfulness of that which he goeth about. And then the meaning of the Text will be only this, that if a man doth any thing on deliberation, of which he is not verily persuaded that he doth well in it, but doth it with a wavering and doubtful mind; he is guilty of sin. The words foregoing give good strength unto this construction, where it is said, that he that doubteth (whether he doth well or ill) is damned if he eat, because he doth it not of faith, that is to say, because he doth it not of a right persuasion, that he doth well in eating what is set before him: which hath no reference at all to faith in Christ No more hath that which is alleged from the 11. to the Hebrews, where it is said, that without faith it is impossible to please God. Which is not to be understood only of faith in Christ, if of that at all: but only of that act of faith in the general notion, by which (for so it followeth in the Text itself) Whosoever cometh unto God, must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him 
(g) Heb. 11.6. . Now that the Gentiles had this faith (conceive me still of the more noble souls amongst them) is clear and evident, by that which they have said of God in their public writings; of which we have produced as much in the former Chapters, as may abundantly suffice to confirm this point. But then perhaps it will be said, that though the things they did were good, ex genere & objecto suo, good in their kind, and in relation unto those who received good by them; as were the feeding of the hungry, clothing of the naked, and such like: yet being looked upon ex fine & circumstantiis, with reference to the end for which, and the circumstances with which they were done; they were both vicious in themselves, and utterly unpleasing in the sight of God. And to this end this passage is alleged out of St. Augustine's works, Non officiis sed finibus virtutes a vitiis discernendas 
(h) August. contra julian. l. 4. c. 3. , that virtues are distinguished from vices, not so much by the work itself, as the end proposed. This we acknowledge to be true, but we say withal, that if the works of faithful men be so pried into, it cannot be, but that there will be either some obliquity in the action, or misapplication in the end: there being no just action so accompanied with all manner of circumstances, as to abide the judgement of Almighty God, if he should be extreme to mark what is done amiss. Both Protestants and Papists do agree in this, although the last do speak more favourably of the works of regenerate persons, than the former do. The Protestants maintain that there is no work done by a godly man in the state of grace, but that there is some sinfulness which doth cleave unto it, and in part doth blemish it. But not so far as to make it lose the name of a good work, or to put the doer of it into the state of damnation, by reason that God for Christ's sake forgives the imperfections, and accepts that which is good 
(i) Whites Way sect. 40. n. 23. . And for the Papists it is thus resolved by Andreas Vega, one of the great sticklers in the Council of Trent, Ipsa etiam perfectorum opera, a bonitate ipsa longe deficere, qua deceret nos Deum colere, etc. 
(k) Vega de justif. lib. 11. c. 38. . i e. the very works of the best men are much defective in that goodness, wherewith we ought to worship, serve, and honour God, because they are conjoined with many imperfections whilst men live here: neither are they so pure, holy, and fervent, as the measure of divine goodness and bounty towards us doth require at our hands. And thereupon he doth conclude, that many good works are done by us, without blot of sin, Quae tamen si districte vellet Deus nobiscum agere, injustitiae essent; which notwithstanding, if God should deal strictly with us would be counted wickedness. So that if virtue must be vice, and good works a sin, because they fail in some of those many circumstances, which are required unto the making of a work to be fully perfect: it is not like to go ill with the Gentiles only, but even with the most righteous of Gods faithful servants.  
'Tis true indeed, the Gentiles had not the assistance of Gods written Word, to be a light unto their paths, and a lamp to their feet 
(l) Psal. 119.105. , (and that is one of the Prerogatives which the Israelites had) for want whereof they could not come so generally to the knowledge of God, nor walk so knowingly in the ways of his laws and precepts. But then perhaps it may be said, (if one would undertake the part of an Advocate in it) that God hath furnished them with some other means for the supplying of this want: which wrought as powerfully on the affections of the learned Gentiles, as did the letter of the law on the Vulgar Israelites. To this head I refer their Politic laws and constitutions for punishing all violent and unlawful actions; but principally the study of Philosophy, by which they were not only restrained from all Criminal actions, which came within the compass of their positive laws: but had their affections so composed, and their lusts so bridled, as to advance them to an eminency in all sorts of virtues; not only doing all that their laws required, but at some times more. And to this purpose was the answer of the wise man Aristotle, who being asked what benefit the study of Philosophy had brought unto him; made this reply, Vt ea facerem injussus, quae plerique per legum metum faciunt 
(m) Diog. Laert. in vita Aristot. , that he thereby discharged those duties without any command, which others were compelled to by the force of laws. A second means whereby GOD might supply the defect of Scripture, was the co-operating of his Grace with that light of Nature, which is implanted naturally in the soul of man: which light assisted by the influence of Preventing Grace, was doubtless able to conduct them in the ways of virtue, and make them do such things as were good and acceptable in the sight of God. For if by Grace we understand (as Greg. Ariminensis saith we may) quod cunque Dei speciale adjutorium ad bene operandum 
(n) Greg. Arimin. l. 2. dist. 28. q. 1. , every special help which God giveth unto us towards doing good: we have no reason to conceive but that those Worthies of the Gentiles had such special helps, or else they never had attained to such special eminence in all virtuous actions. Though God restrained his written Word unto Israel only, yet find we not that he confined his Grace to so narrow a compass; or that he could not give a portion of his holy Spirit unto whom he pleased. Had it been so, what had become of job of the land of Us, of Rahab a Canaanitish woman, of Ruth a Moabite? How had the Aethiopian Eunuch been invited to see Jerusalem, or Cornelius the Centurion found such favour of God, as to be warned in a Vision touching his salvation; if God had given his Grace with respect of persons, or thought no creature worthy of it but a jew by Nation? For my part I have no Commission to call any thing common or unclean that God hath cleansed 
(o) Act. 10.14, 15. , or to shut the gates of Heaven against any of those that are renowned upon record for a virtuous life, considering that I find in Scripture, that in every Nation be that feareth God, and worketh righteousness, is accepted of him. Nor can I think it a dishonour to Almighty God, to be a rewarder of all those who seek him diligently, according to that measure of faith and knowledge, which is given unto them: or that it is derogatory to the written Word, that men of riper years should be saved without it in extraordinary cases, and of special grace. And I say men of riper years, because I find the case of children to be very different; of whose salvation, although born of Infidel parents, some principal and leading men of the Reformation make no doubt at all of this opinion; amongst others, was Franciscus junius, as grave and eminent a Divine as any which that Age offered; and a great stickler against Arminius in the controversy of Predestination. The passage you may see at large in his book de Natura & gratia, Num. 28. but the sum is this. Omnino statuimus servatum iri etc. 
(p) jun. de Natur. & great. u 28. . He doubteth not but that many of the children of Infidels are saved, partly by virtue of the Covenant, and partly by God's Election. By virtue of the Covenant in regard they are descended of such Ancestors, as were themselves within the Covenant, though it be long since, and that there be some interruption in the whole succession, God's mercy reaching (as he tells us Exod. 20.) unto a thousand generations. By Election, because God hath not barred himself from a power and right to communicate his Grace to those whose Ancestors were not of the Covenant. For if he called those Adulti men of riper years to be partakers of the Covenant, who were not within the same before; why may he not in like manner, if he please, elect children also? Finally, as he doth believe that all who are elected, or within the Covenant, shall most undoubtedly be saved: so he doth charitably conceive that those whom God takes out of this world in the state of infancy, servari potius secundum electionem & providentiam ipsius paternam, quam a regno Coelorum abdicari, are rather saved by God's election and paternal providence, then utterly excluded out of the Kingdom of Heaven. If the same charity make me hope the like of those famous men among the Gentiles, who were not wanting to the grace of God which was given unto them, why should I fear worse fortune than was found by junius, who never yet was censured (for aught I have read) for that so charitable resolution in the case of Infants, no not by those of the Reformed, who differ in opinion from him as to that particular? And so far I conceive I may go with safety, without opposing any text of holy Scripture, or any public tendry of the Church of England. 'Tis true, St. Peter telleth us in the 4. of the Acts, that there is no name under Heaven given among men whereby they be saved, but that of our Lord and Saviour JESUS CHRIST, v. 12. But this is spoken with relation to the times of the Gospel, when CHRIST had broken down the partition wall, and that the Gentiles were admitted to the knowledge of the word of life: a general command being laid by CHRIST on his Apostles to preach the Gospel to all Nations 
(a) Mat. 28. . After this time the case was altered; and the Gentiles altogether left without excuse, if they embraced not the ordinary means of their salvation, which by the universal preaching of Christ crucified had been offered to them. And so I understand that Article of the Church of England, by which all they are to be accursed who presume to say that every man shall be saved by the Law or Sect that he professeth, so that he be diligent to frame his life according to that Law and the light of nature. Act. 18. For certainly the Article relates not to the times before Christ's coming, or the condition of the Gentiles in those elder days, but only to the present condition of the Church of Christ as it now stands, and hath stood since his death and passion, 
(b) H. Nicols Preface to 3.  in opposition both to jews and Gentiles, unto Turks and Saracens; with reference to the Familists, and such modern Sectaries, who made the external profession of the faith of Christ but a thing indifferent, so they conformed themselves by the light of nature. Of which opinion one Galcalus Martius also is affirmed to be by Paulus jovius in his Elog. doct: virorum. So that for aught appears from that place of the Acts, and from this Article of the Church, we may conceive the charitable hope of the salvation of some of the more noble Gentiles, the great example of whose virtues is transmitted to us in Classical and approved Authors.  
But this was only in some extraordinary and especial cases, some Casus reservati, as the Lawyers call them, which God reserved to his own Power and dispensation, and not of any ordinary and common right. For generally the Heathen people, as they knew not God, having extinguished that light of nature which was given unto them: so having their understanding darkened, and that light put out, their will forthwith became depraved, the affections of their hearts corrupted, and their lusts exorbitant. And as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, so did God give them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient 
(q) Rom. 1.28, 29. , dishonouring their own bodies amongst themselves, and being filled with all unrighteousness and uncleanness: Nay, even their greatest Clerks, men of wit and learning, professing themselves wise did become fools, in that they sought not after God, the true fountain of wisdom 
(r) Id. v. 22.18, 20. : and holding the truth which was revealed to them, in unrighteousness, as St. Paul saith of them, were thereby made without excuse. And as the light of nature was thus generally extinguished amongst the Gentiles; so was the light of Prophecy as much neglected amongst the jews: who though they were Gods chosen and peculiar people, had so degenerated from the piety of their Predecessors, that there was hardly either faith or charity to be found amongst them. Insomuch as all the world was now of the same condition, in which it was before the flood. Of which God said, that all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth 
(s) Gen. 6.12.5. , the wickedness of man grown great, and all the imaginations of the thoughts of his heart continually and only evil. Nothing could have prevented a second deluge, but God's gracious promise that there should never more be a flood to destroy the Earth 
(t) Gen. 9.11. ; nothing have respited the World from more grievous punishment, had not Christ come into the World; and by his suffering on the Cross for the sin of Man, appeased God's anger for the present, and caused his Gospel to be preached unto every nation, that so they might escape the wrath of the time to come. Nothing required by him for so great a mercy, but that we would believe in him: that to the faith, which every man was bound before to have in God the Father Almighty, by whom we were created when we were just nothing; there might be added a belief in JESUS CHRIST his only Son, by whom we were redeemed being worse than nothing. He knew the frailty of our nature that we were but dust, that we were utterly unable to observe the Law, which Adam either could not or would not keep in the state of innocency: and therefore did not look so far as to the Covenant of works to require them of us, but to the Covenant of faith as the easier duty. God in the Covenant of works required of every man for his justification, an absolute and entire obedience to the Law which he had prescribed; and that obedience to the Law had it been performed, had justified the performance of it in the sight of God. But finding man unable to fulfil the Law, he made a second Covenant with that sinful Creature, and required nothing of him for his justification but only faith in God and his gracious promises for the redemption of the world till the coming of CHRIST; and after a more explicit faith in Christ, when he had redeemed it, than had been pressed before on the house of jacob. CHRIST hath redeemed us (saith St. Paul) from the curse of the Law, that the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles through JESUS CHRIST 
(u) Gal. 3.13, 14. : that is to say, that as Abraham did believe in God, and that was imputed unto him for righteousness, even so the Gentiles thorough faith in JESUS CHRIST might be justified also. And yet faith doth not justify, (conceive not so) out of any property that is natural or essential to it, or any dignity or work inherent in it above other Theological virtues; but out of somewhat that is adventitious and extrinsical merely, that is to say, the will, good-pleasure, or appointment of Almighty God. This is the will of him that sent me (saith our Saviour) that every Man that seeth the Son and believeth in him, should have life everlasting 
(x) Joh. 6.40▪ . Where clearly he suspends the justifying property or power of faith, not upon any quality or virtue that it hath in itself, but only on the will and free grace of God: which had it fallen in conjunction or cooperation with any other of God's graces, either hope, or patience; or any other whatsoever; that act of grace, or the act rather of that grace so by God appointed, would have conduced as fully to our justification as now the act of faith or believing doth.  
But now to trouble ourselves with these speculations, suffice it that as God was pleased to make choice of faith, so he made choice not of the habit, or the object, but the act of faith, to be imputed to us for our justification. Abraham believed God (saith the holy Scripture) and it was counted unto him for righteousness 
(y) Gen. 15.6. & Rom. 4.3. . Nor is it thus with Abraham only, but with all the faithful, who if they do believe on him that justifyeth the ungodly, that faith of theirs shall be accounted unto them for righteousness also 
(z) Rom. 4.5. . 'tis the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Credere, the very act of faith itself, which God requireth of us for our justification, in stead of all the works of the Law: and if we do believe, as we ought to do, that every act of our believing, without the help of any of the works of the Law, shall be imputed to us for righteousness. Seven times at least in the fourth Chapter of the Romans hath the Apostle used this phrase to account or impute faith for righteousness unto the believer. We find the same phrase also used in the 3. Chapter to the Galatians vers. 5. and in the 2. of St. james vers. 23. Scarce such another consonancy of expression in the holy Scripture. Which certainly the holy Ghost had not stood upon, not bound himself precisely to the words and syllables of: if he had not meant to give this honour unto faith itself, but rather to some other thing which faith layeth hold of and applieth for our endless comfort. And this, as it is most agreeable to the Text and Context, where faith is put in opposition unto works, that faith alone might have the honour of our justification: so hath it been the constant Doctrine of the ancient Writers, who do ascribe the same to faith, and to faith properly so called, not as the word is taken tropically or metonymically for the object thereof. For thus saith justin Martyr, first, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(a) Iust. M. dial. cum Tryphon. . Abraham, saith he, had not from God the testimony or commendation of righteousness, because of his circumcision, but because of his faith. Tertullian next, How, saith he, are we made the children of faith, or of whose faith if not of Abraham's? For if Abraham believed God, and that was imputed unto him for righteousness, and he deserved thereby to be made the Father of many nations 
(b) Tertull. advers. Marc. l. 5. c. 3 : Not autem credendo Deo magis, pro inde justificamur, sicut Abraham, we by believing God more, (as having more things to believe then Abraham had, for that I take it is his meaning) are therefore also justified as Abraham was. Next to him, that of Origen which we had before, Cum multae fides Abraham praecesserint, etc. 
(c) Orig. in Rom. c. 4.  Whereas many faiths, (or many acts of Abraham's faith) had gone before, now all his faith was recollected and summed up together, and so imputed unto him for his justification. St. Ambrose in fewer words saith as much as any, Sic decretum dicit a Deo, ut cessante lege, solam fidem gratia Dei posceret ad salutem 
(d) Amb. in Rom. c. 4. : God, saith he, hath so decreed, that the Law ceasing, the grace of God should require only faith of man towards his salvation. Why was this writ (saith St. chrysostom) of our father Abraham? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(e) Chrysost. in. Rom. c. 4. : but that we may learn that we are also justified as Abraham was, because we have believed the same God? And in another place, What was Abraham the worse for not being under the Law? To which he answereth, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he was nothing the worse; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(f) Id. in Gal. 3. , for his faith was sufficient for his justification. What saith St. Augustine of himself? In eum credo qui justificat impium, ut deputetur fides mea ad justitiam 
(g) August. in Psal. 70. ; that is to say, I do believe in him that justifyeth the ungodly, that my faith may be imputed to me for righteousness. What doth the same Father say of Abraham in another place, if at the least the work be his? Ecce sine opere justificatur ex fide; et quicquid illi legali observatione potest conferri, totum credulitas sua donavit 
(h) Id. de Temp. serm. 68 . Behold, saith he, Abraham is justified without works, by faith: and whatsoever could have been conferred upon him by the observation of the Law, that his believing only hath wholly given him. Primasius somewhat after him in the course of time, Tam magna fuit dono dei fides Abrahami, ut et pristina peccata ei donarentur, et sola prae omni justitia doceretur accepta 
(i) Primas. in Rom. c. 4. , i. e. So great was Abraham's faith by the gift of God, that both his former sins were pardoned, and this his faith alone was preferred in acceptation before all righteousness. And finally thus Haimo B. of Halberstad, an Author of the 9 Century, to descend no lower. Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness, that is, saith he, unto remission of sins 
(k) Haimo in Rom. c. 4. ; quia per ipsam fidem qua credidit justus effectus est, because by that faith wherewith he believed, he was made righteous. By all which testimonies of the ancients it is plain and evident, that faith is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere, or the very act of believing, is that which is imputed to us for our justification: and that this is no new interpretation excogitated by Arminius in these latter days, as some please to tell us. Nor is this contrary to the Church of England delivered in her book of Homilies, though at the first appearance it may so be thought. When we affirm that We are justified only by faith in Christ, we understand not 
(l) Homil. of Salvat. pt. 2.  (saith the Book) that this our own act to believe in Christ, or this faith in Christ which is within us, doth justify us, and deserve our justification unto us, for that were to count ourselves to be justified by ●ome act or virtue that is within ourselves: but that we must renounce the merit of faith, hope, charity, and all other virtues as things that be far too weak, imperfect, and insufficient to deserve remission of sins, and our justification, and must trust only on God's mercy in the blood of Christ. Where plainly it is not the intent of the Book of Homilies to exclude the act of faith from being an external and impulsive cause of our justification; but from being the meritorious cause thereof in the sight of God, from having any thing to do therein, in the way of merit: Or if they do relate to the act of faith, it is not to the act of faith as the gift of God, but as to somewhat which we call and account our own, without acknowledging the same to be given by him. And in that sense, to say that we are justified by any thing within ourselves, which is so properly our own as not given by God, is evidently opposite to that of the holy Scripture, viz. By grace ye are saved through faith, and not of yourselves; it is the gift of God 
(m) Eph. 2.8. : that is to say, that faith by which ye are saved is the gift of God. And certainly it is no wonder, if faith in Christ should be acknowledged and esteemed the gift of God, considering that we have Christ himself no otherwise, which is the object of our faith, then by gift from God: who did so love the world (as our Saviour telleth us) that he gave his only begotten Son; to the end that whosoever believed in him should not perish but have life everlasting 
(n) Joh. 3.16. . Of which great mercy of the Lord in giving his beloved Son, and of the sufferings of that Son for our redemption, I am next to speak.    

THE SUM OF Christian Theology, Positive, Philological, and Polemical; CONTAINED IN THE Apostles CREED, Or reducible to it.  
The Second Part.  
By PETER HEYLYN.  1 Tim. 3.16. 
Without controversy great is the Mystery of godliness, God manifested in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of Angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.  
LONDON, Printed by E. Cotes for Henry Seile, 1654.   

ARTICLE III. Of the Third ARTICLE OF THE CREED Ascribed to St. JAMES. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. i e. Credo et in Jesum Christum filium ejus unicum, Dominum nostrum. i e. And in JESUS CHRIST his only Son our Lord.  

CHAP. VIII. Nothing revealed to the Gentiles touching Christ to come. The name of JESUS what it signifieth; and of bowing at it. Of the name CHRIST, and the offices therein included. The name of Christians how given unto his Disciples.  
THUS are we come to that part of the Christian Creed, which doth concern the World's Redemption by our Lord and Saviour JESUS CHRIST. A part, to which we are not like to find much credit from the stubborn and untractable jews, except it be to so much of it as concerns his sufferings under Pontius Pilate, of which they made themselves the unhappy instruments: and very little help for the proof thereof, from any of the learned Gentiles, who being taken up with high speculations, would not vouchsafe to look so low as a crucified JESUS. The preaching of Christ crucified (as St. Paul hath told us) as to the jews who were a proud highminded people, it became a stumbling block, so to the Greeks, who boasted in the pride of learning and humane wisdom, it was counted foolishness 
(a) 1 Cor. 1.23. . And if it were so counted a part post, when he that was the light to lighten the Gentiles 
(b) Luk. 2.52. , had shined so visibly amongst them, and countenanced the preaching of his holy Gospel by such signs and wonders, as did in fine gain credit to it over all the world; it is not to be thought that they had any clearer knowledge of salvation by him, or by the preaching of his Gospel, a part ante. The jews indeed had many notable advantages which the Gentiles had not. For unto them pertained the Adoption, and the glory, and the Covenants, and the giving of the Law, and the service of God, and the promises 
(c) Rom. 9.4. . They had moreover amongst them the Prophetical writings, or as St. Peter calls it, the sure word of Prophecy 
(d) 2 Pet. 1.19. , which like a light shining in a dark place, might well have served to guide them in the way of truth, to keep them in a constant expectation of their Saviour's coming; and when he came, to entertain him with all joy and cheerfulness. Yet when he came unto his own, they received him not 
(e) Joh. 1.11. : that miserable obduration being fallen upon them, that seeing they did see and not perceive, that hearing they did hear but not understand 
(f) Mark. 4.12. . But on the other side, the Gentiles wanted all those helps, to bring them to the knowledge of their promised Saviour; which were so plentifully communicated to the house of Israel. For though the Lord had signified by the prophet Isaiah, saying, There shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall rise to reign over the Gentiles, in him shall the Gentiles trust 
(g) Isa. 11.10. : yet this was more than God had pleased to manifest to the Gentiles themselves, till they were actually called to the knowledge of CHRIST by the ministry of St. Peter 
(h) Act. 10. , and the accomplishment of this prophecy made known unto them by the application of St. Paul 
(i) Rom. 15.12. . The light of natural reason could instruct them in this general principle, that there was a God: for nulla gens tam barbara, said the Latin Orator 
(k) Cicero de Natura Deor. , never was man so brutish, or nation so barbarous which in the works of nature could not read a Deity. And the same light of natural reason could instruct them also, that that God whosoever he was, was to be served and worshipped by them with their best devotions. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(l) Isocrat. ad Demonic. , in the first place to serve and reverence the Gods, was one of the most special Rules which the Greek Orator commended to his dear Demonicus. But that it should please God in the fullness of time to send his son made of a woman, made under the Law, to redeem such as were under the Law, that they might receive the Adoption of sons 
(m) Gal. 4.4. : that CHRIST should come into the world to save sinners 
(n) 1 Tim. 1.15 , and breaking down the partition wall between Jew and Gentile make one Church of both 
(o) Eph. 2.14. : neither the light of nature, nor the rule of reason, nor any industry in their studies could acquaint them with. This St. Paul calleth a mystery not made known in other ages to the sons of men 
(p) Eph. 3.5. , a mystery hidden from the generations 
(q) Col. 1.26.  of preceding times: and if a mystery, a secret and an hidden mystery, we should but lose time did we look to find it in any writings or records of the ancient Gentiles. So that we may affirm of the knowledge of CHRIST as Lactantiuss did in general of the ttue Religion: Nondum fas esse alienigenis hominibus Religionem Dei veri justitiamque cognoscere 
(r) Lact. l. 4. c. 2. ; the time was not yet come in which the Gentiles should be made acquainted with those heavenly mysteries, which did concern the Kingdom of our Lord and Saviour.  
'tis true, the Sibylline Oracles cited by Lactantius 
(s) Id. l. 4. c. 15. , and others of great eminence in the Primitive times, speak very clearly in some things concerning the life and death of CHRIST: in so much that they seem rather written in the way of History, then in that of Prophecy. And though the learned Casaubon 
(t) Casab, Exerc. in Baron. , and others of our great Philologers, conceive them to be pious frauds, composed of purpose by some Christians of the elder ages, and added as a supplement to the true Originals, the better to win credit to the faith of CHRIST: yet dare I not so far disparage those good Catholic writers as to believe they would support so strong an edifice with so weak a prop, or borrow help from falsehood to evict the truth. Or if they durst have been so venturous, how easy had it been for their learned Adversaries, Porphyry, julian, and the rest of more eminent note, to have detected the Imposture, and silenced the Christian Advocates with reproach enough. Letting this therefore go for granted, as I think I may, that the Sibylline Oracles are truly cited by the Fathers, and that they do contain most things which happened to our Saviour in his life and death: yet could this give but little light to the Heathen people, touching CHRIST to come, because they were not suffered to be extant publicly, and consequently came not to the knowledge of the learned Gentiles, till by the care and diligence of the Christian Writers they were after published. For so exceeding coy were the ancient Romans of suffering the Sibyls or their works to go abroad, having got into their hands the best copies of them that those times afforded: that they commanded them to be kept closely in the Capitol, under the care and charge of particular Officers 
(u) Fenestella de Sacerdot. c. 13. , whom from the number of fifteen (for so many they were) they called Quindecemviri, and to whom only it was lawful to consult their papers. Nec eos ab ullo nisi a Quindecemviris f●s est inspici 
(x) Lactant. l. 1. c. 6. , as Lactantius notes it very truly. And it is also very true, that many of the ancient and most learned Grecians had a confused notice of a second Deity, whom they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or the Word: making him aiding and subservient to Almighty God in the Creation of the world, and therefore giving him the attribute of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(y) Id. l. 4. c. 6. , or the world's Creator. The several testimonies to this purpose he that lists to see, may find them mustered up together in that laborious work of the Lord du Plessis, entitled De veritate Religionis Christianae, cap. 6. So frequently occurs this notion in the old Philosophers, especially in those of the School of Plato, that Porphyry an Apostate Christian, and a Platonic in the course of his sect and studies, blasphemously averred that St. john had stolen the first words of his Gospel, [viz. In the beginning was the Word, etc.] from his Master Plato. And though the affirmation of that vile Apostata, intended only the disgrace of the holy Evangelist, and of the Gospel by him written for the use of the Church: yet had it been a truth, as indeed it was not, it could have been no greater a disparagement to St. john to borrow an expression from a Greek Philosopher, then to St. Paul to use the very words of three Grecian Poets. But the truth is, that both St. john and the Platonics together with the rest of those old Heroes, borrowed the notion from the Doctors of the jewish Nation; as Maldonate hath proved at large 
(z) Maldon. in Joh. 1. n. 22.  in his Comment on that Text of the blessed Evangelist: who withal gives it for the reason why S. john made choice rather of this notion then of any other, in the front or entrance of his Gospel, because it was so known and acceptable both to jew and Gentile, Philosophos non dubium est ab antiquis Hebraeis & hausisse sententiam & vocabulum accepisse. Proinde voluit Johannes accommodate ad usum loqui, saith the learned jesuit. But then withal we must observe, that though we find such frequent mention of the Word, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the writings of the ancient Gentiles; yet find we almost nothing of him but the name or notion: nothing that doth relate to the salvation of man, the taking of our nature upon him, or being made a propitiation for the sins of mankind. That, as before I noted, was a secret mystery, not to be manifested to the sons of the Gentiles, till CHRIST himself was come to make one of both, and call them to the knowledge of his grace and faith in him.  
Being so called they were no longer to be differenced by the name of Gentiles, but fellow-heirs and of the same body 
(a) Epes. 3.6. , whereof CHRIST is Head; and as the members of that body, to join in the Confession of the self same faith; not only as to God the Father, in the acknowledgement of which Article all the Nations meet, but as unto his only Son JESUS CHRIST our Lord, from whence the faith hath properly the name of Christian. Now that which we believe touching CHRIST our Saviour, and is to be the argument of this present Book, is thus delivered by the pen of our Reverend jewel, in the name, and for the use and edification of the Church of England. Credimus Jesum Christum filium unicum aeterni patris, etc. 
(b) jewel in Apol. Eccl. Anglic. . i e. We believe that JESUS CHRIST, the only Son of the eternal Father, (as it had been determined before all beginnings) when the fullness of time was come, did take of that blessed and pure Virgin, both flesh and all the nature of man, that he might declare unto the world the secret and hidden will of his Father, and that he might fulfil in his humane body the Mystery of our Redemption, and might fasten our sins unto the Cross, and blot out that hand-writing which was against us. We believe that for our sakes he died and was buried, descended into Hell, and the third day by the power of his Godhead rose again to life: and that the fortieth day after his Resurrection, whi●est his Disciples looked on, he ascended into Heaven to fulfil all things, and did place in Majesty and glory the self same body wherewith he was born, in which he lived upon the earth, in which he was scornfully derided, and suffered most painful torments, and a cruel death; and finally, in which he rose again from the dead, and ascended to the right hand of the Father, above all principalities and powers, and might, and dominion; that there he now sitteth, and shall sit till all things be fully perfected. We believe also that from that place he shall come again to execute that general judgement, as well of them whom he shall then find alive in the body, as of them that shall be already dead. This is the main of that which is to be believed touching CHRIST JESUS our Lord; but so that we divide not the man CHRIST JESUS from JESUS CHRIST the Son of God. For though that note of Estius be exceeding true, that all things contained in the Creed concerning Christ from his conception in the womb of the Virgin to his last coming unto judgement inclusively, de Christo dicuntur secundum humanam naturam 
(c) Estius in Marc. cap. ult. , are verified and affirmed of him in his humane nature: yet are we also bound to believe this of him: that he was so truly and indissolubly the Son of God (according to the Tenor of this present Article; that whilst this man was born of the Virgin Mary, the Son of God was also born of the self same Virgin; whilst the man CHRIST JESUS suffered under Pontius Pilate, the Son of God was also crucified, dead and buried. Et sic de caeteris. For otherwise Tacitus, who reporteth his sufferings under Pontius Pilate 
(d) Tacit. Annal. l. 15. ; and Pontius Pilate who gave testimony to his Resurrection, in a Letter writ on that occasion to Tiberius Caesar 
(e) Euseb. Eccl. hist. l. 1. ; or Nicolas, one of the Seven, the Founder of the Sect of the Nicolaitans 
(f) Apocal. 2.6. , who beheld him at the instant of his Ascension; might pass for Orthodox professors of the Christian Faith. Besides, a partial assent to one or to some only of the Articles which relate to CHRIST, is not enough to give denomination to a true believer. It must be uniform, and alike sincere unto every truth recorded of him in the Scriptures, or summarily comprehended in the present Creed; which qualifieth a man a right to deserve that title. So that unless we fix ourselves upon this Principle, that JESUS CHRIST our Lord is the Son of God, (the only begotten Son of God, as the Nicene hath it) and carry the same with us through every Article, which hath relation to his Person: our Faith being partial only to some matters of fact, and not complete and perfect in each several lineament, falls short of that assent to the Word of God, and all those supernatural truths revealed in it, which is required unto the constitution of salvifical fa●th.  
Now for the better understanding of the present Article, which is so operative and influential over all the rest: we will resolve it first into this Proposition, that JESUS CHRIST our Lord is the Son of God, the only begotten Son of God, as before we had it from the Nicene. And having so resolved it into this Proposition, will take a view thereof in its several parts; and look upon our Saviour Christ first in his Person and his Office, next in his several relations unto God and man. His Person we find represented in the name of JESUS, his Offices in that of CHRIST; his reference or relation to Almighty God, as he is his Son, his only Son; to man, as he is made our Lord. First for his person or his nature, we find it represented in the name of JESUS (for Christus nomen est officii, Jesus naturae & personae 
(g) Maldonat, in Mat. c. 1. , as the learned note) and that originally Hebrew, derived from the future tense of the verb jashang, which signifieth Salvavit, i. e. he hath saved; or from the substantive Isshagnah, which is as much as salus ipsa, or salvation itself. If from the first, it is the very same in Hebrew with that of jehoshua, (or joshua as our English reads it) the son of Nun; who by St. Luke, Act. 7.45. and by St. Paul, Heb. 4.8. is called plainly jesus: and then the difference betwixt him and the son of Nun, will consist rather in the manner of the salvation which he hath bestowed, then in the property of the name. If from the second, we find more in old Simeons Nunc dimittis then hath been generally observed: who did not only praise the Lord, because his eyes had seen his Saviour, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the salvation of God. And then those Texts of holy Scripture, which speak so clearly of the Salvation of God, or where God is called our Salvation, as Exod. 15.2 Esa. 12.1, 2, 3. & 49.6. & 52.10. & 56.1. and also Habak. 3.18. may possibly be intended of CHRIST our Saviour. But whether this be so or not, it can be no disparagement to the Son of God, to have his name derived from the same Original, with joshua the son of Nun, who was so clear a type of the Lord himself, that scarce a clearer doth occur in the book of God. For as Moses the Lawgiver of the jews, though he did bring that people out of the land of Egypt, was not so happy as to settle them in the land of Canaan, but left that work to be performed by the hand of jesus the Son of Nun: so neither could the Law, which was the School-mistris unto CHRIST 
(h) Gal. 3.24. , though it dispelled the clouds of Egyptian darkness, bring them that did live under it into the Sanctum Sanctorum, but left the honour of the work to JESUS the Son of God. And as joshua (or jesus) the son of Nun, having subdued the heathenish Princes who possessed the land, estated the whole house of jacob in possession of it: so JESUS CHRIST the Son of the living God, having subdued Sin, Hell, and Satan, who held the whole world of mankind under their subjection, brought those who are the children of Abraham's faith, into a peaceable fruition of the land of Promise, whereof the land of Canaan was a Type or figure. The difference as unto the name, was in this especially, that joshua the son of Nun was at first called Oshea, Numb. 13.9. and had his name changed afterwards by Moses, vers. 16. on some presage perhaps of his future greatness: but JESUS CHRIST the Son of God, received that name from God himself in his first conception. For thus the Angel Gabriel to the blessed Virgin, Behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a Son, and shalt call his name JESUS 
(i) Luk. 1.31. . The reason of which choice or appellation, is by another Angel thus given to joseph; Ipse enim salvum faciet populum suum, etc. 
(k) Mat. 1.21. . i e. for he shall save his people from all their sins. Here than we have a salvabit, or a salvum faciet, to manifest the true interpretation of this blessed name, and therewithal the nature of a more blessed Person. And so Ruffinus doth resolve it, JESUS Hebraei vocabuli nomen est, quod apud nos Salvator dicitur 
(l) Ruffin. in Symb. . JESUS, saith he, is an Hebrew name, and signifieth as much as Saviour. Where we may note, that the old Author keeps himself to the old Ecclesiastical word Salvator; and was not so in love with the Roman elegancies, (as Beza for the most part is in his translation) as to obtrude Servator on us, in the place thereof. Concerning which St. Augustine hath this observation, that anciently Salvator was no Latin word, but was first devised by the Christians to express the greatness of the mercies which they had in Christ. For thus the Father. Qui est Hebraice JESUS, Graece 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, nostra autem locutione Salvator. Quod verbum Latina lingua non habebat, sed habere poterat, sicut potuit quando voluit 
(m) August. de Trinit. l. 3.10. . Nay Cicero the great Master of the Roman elegancies doth himself confess, that the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a word of too high a nature to be expressed by any one word of the Latin tongue. For showing how that Verres being Praetor in Syracuse, the chief town in Sicily, had caused himself to be entitled by the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he adds immediately, hoc ita magnum est, ut Latino uno verbo exprimi non possit 
(n) Cicero Act. 2. in Verrem. . And thereupon he is compelled to use this Paraphrase or circumlocution, Is est nimirum Soter, qui salutem dedit, i. e. He properly may be called Soter, who is giver of health. So that the Latin word Servator being insufficient to express the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and consequently the Hebrew JESUS, the Christians of the first times were necessitated to devise some other, and at last pitched upon Salvator: which to this purpose hath been used by Arnobius, l. 1. adv. Gentes, Ambros. in Luk. c. 2. Hieron. in Ezek. c. 40. August. de doctr. Chr. l. 2. c. 13. contr. Crescon. l. 2. c. 1. besides the passages from Ruffinus and the same St. Augustine before alleged.  
So then the name of jesus doth import a Saviour; and the name of JESUS given to the Son of God, intimates or implieth rather such a Saviour, as shall save his people from their sins. This differenceth JESUS our most blessed Saviour, from all which bore that name in the times foregoing. jesus, or joshua the son of Nun, did only save the people from their temporal enemies; but JESUS CHRIST the Son of the living God, doth save us from the bonds of sin, from our ghostly enemies. JESUS the son of josedech the Priest, of the Order of Aaron, did only build up the material Altar 
(o) Ezra. 3.2. , in the holy Temple; but JESUS the High Priest for ever after the Order of Melchisedech, not only buildeth up the spiritual Temple, but is himself the very Altar which sanctifieth all those oblations which we make to God. jesus the son of Sirach hath no higher honour, but that he was Author of the book called Ecclesiasticus, a book not reckoned in the Canon of the holy Scripture; but JESUS CHRIST the Son of God and the Virgin Mary, not only is the subject of a great part of Scripture, but even the Word itself, and the very Canon, by which we are to square all our lives and actions. I am the way, the truth and the life 
(p) Joh. 14.6. , as himself telleth us in St. john. Look on him in all these capacities he is still a JESUS, a Saviour of his people from their sins and wickednesses; a builder of them up to a holy Temple, fit for the habitation of the holy Ghost; a bringer of them by the truth, and way of righteousness unto the gates of life eternal; a true JESUS still. So properly a JESUS, and so perfectly a Saviour to us, that there is no salvation to be found in any other 
(q) Act. 4.12. , nor is there any other name under Heaven given amongst men, whereby they must be saved, but this name of JESUS. A● name, if rightly pondered, above every name 
(r) Phil. 2.9, 10. , and given him (to this end) by Almighty God, that at the Name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in Heaven, and earth, and under the earth. And there may be good reason besides God's appointment, why such a sign of reverence should be given to the very name: not only a name above other names, and therefore to be reverenced with the greater piety; but as a pregnant testimony of that exaltation, to which God hath advanced him above all other persons. We bow the knee unto the persons of Kings and Princes. And therefore Pharaoh when he purposed to honour joseph above all the Egyptians, appointed certain Officers to cry before him 
(s) Gen. 41.43. , saying, bow the knee. CHRIST had not been exalted more than joseph was, had bowing of the knee been required to his Person only: and therefore that there might appear some difference betwixt him and others, the Lord requires it at his name. And though the Angels in the heavens, and the Spirits beneath, have no knees to bow (which is the principal objection of our Innovators against the reverend use of bowing at the Name of jesus used and enjoined to be used in the Church of England), yet out of doubt the spirits of both kinds both in Heaven and Hell, as they acknowledge a subjection to his Throne and Sceptre; so have they their peculiar ways, such as are most agreeable to their several natures of yielding the commanded reverence to his very Name. Certain I am St. Ambrose understood the words in the literal sense, where speaking of the several parts of the body of man he maketh the bowing at the name of JESUS, the use and duty of the knee 
(t) Ambr. Hexaem. l. 6. c. 9 . Flexibile genu, quo prae caeteris Domini mitigatur offensa, gratia provocatur. Hoc enim patris summi erga filium donum est, ut in nomine JESUS omne genu curvetur. The knee is flexible, faith the Father, whereby the anger of the Lord is mitigated and his grace obtained. And with this gift did God the Father gratify his beloved Son, that at the Name of JESUS every knee should bow. Nor did St. Ambrose only so expound the Text, and take it in the literal sense, as the words import, but as it is affirmed by our Reverend Andrews 
(u) B. Andr. on the Resur. Serm. 9 , there is no ancient Writer upon the place (save he that turned all into Allegories) but literally understands it, and liketh well enough that we should actually perform it. Conform unto which Exposition of the Ancient Writers, and the received usage of the Church of Christ, it was religiously ordained by our first Reformers, that Whensoever the Name of JESUS shall be pronounced in any Lesson, Sermon, or otherwise in the Church, due reverence be made of all persons young and old with lowness of courtesy, and uncovering of the heads of the mankind, as thereunto doth necessarily belong, and heretofore hath been accustomed. Which being first established by the Queen's Injunctions 
(x) Queen injunction 1559. n. 52. , in the year 1559. was afterwards incorporated into the Canons of King james his reign 
(y) Can. 18. of the year 1603. . And if of so long standing in the Church of England, then sure no Innovation or new fancy taken up of late, and b●t of la●e obtruded on the Church by some Popish Bishops, as the Novators and Novatians of this present age, the Enemies of jesu-worship 
(z) H. Burton, & alii passim. , (as they idly call it) have been pleased to say. And should we grant that this were no duty of the Text, as I think we need not, yet might it give the Church a justifiable ground of commanding such a duty to all Christian people: To the end that by those outward ceremonies and gestures their inward humility, Christian resolution, and due acknowledgement that the Lord JESUS CHRIST the true and eternal Son of God is the only Saviour of the world, in whom alone all the graces, mercies and promises of God to mankind for this life and the life to come are fully and wholly comprehended. Which is the end proposed and published by the Church of England, as appears plainly by the 18. Canon, An. 1603.  
As JESUS is the name of our Lord and Saviour, his personal and proper name, by which he was distinguished from the rest of his Father's kindred; ●o CHRIST is added thereunto both in the holy Scriptures and the present Creed to denote his offices. Christus non proprium nomen est, sed nuncupati● potestatis & regni 
(a) Lact. l. 4. cap. 7. . CHRIST (saith Lactantius) is no proper name, but a name of power and principality. It signifieth properly an anointed, and is derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which signifieth to anoint, and was used by the old Grecians, for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is a word of the same signification but more common use. And so the word is used by Homer, the Prince of the Greek Poets, saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. they washed, and then anointed themselves with oil. The Hebrew word Messiah corresponds to this, as appears evidently by that passage in St. john's Gospel, where Andrew telleth his brother Simon this most joyful news, viz. We have found the Messias, which being interpreted is the CHRIST 
(c) Joh. 1.41. . And '●is no wonder if Andrew ran with so much joy to acquaint his brother with the news, for by the name of the Messiah, the jews had long expected the performance of the promise which God made to David, that of the fruit of his body there should one sit upon his Throne for evermore 
(d) Psal. 132.11. . But the word CHRIST implies more yet then a name of Sovereignty. For though Kings anciently were anointed, as is plain by examples of the Saul, 1 Sam. 10.1. & 2 Sam. 2.4. yet not only they. The High Priest also was anointed; For it is said of Moses, that he poured the anointing oil upon Aaron's head, and anointed him to sanctify him 
(e) Leu. 8.12. . And so the Prophet seems to be in the Book of Kings, where Elijah is commanded to anoint Elisha the son of Shaphat to be the Prophet in his room 
(f) 1 King. 19.16. . Vngebantur Reges, Sacerdotes, Prophetae, saith a learned Writer: and each of these respectively in their several places might be called Christus Domini, the Lords anointed, or the Lords Christ; but our Redeemer, after a more peculiar manner, was Christus Dominus, the Lord Christ, or the Lord anointed. And certainly there was good reason why the Name of CHRIST should be applied to him in another manner, than it had been to any in the times before: he being the one and only Person in whom the Offices of King, Priest, and Prophet, had ever met before that time. Although those Offices had formerly met double in the self same person▪ M●lchisedech a King and Priest, Samuel a Prophet and a Priest, David a Prophet and a King: Yet never did all three concur but in him alone, and so no perfect CHRIST but he. A Priest he was after the order of Melchisedech, Psal. 110. vers. 4. A Prophet to be heard when Moses should hold his peace, Deut. 18.18. A King to be raised out of David's seed, who should reign and prosper, and execute judgement and justice in the earth, jer. 23 5. By his Priesthood to purge, expiate and save us from our sins, for which he was to be the Propitiation 
(g) 1 Joh. 2 2. . By his Prophetical Office to illuminate and save us from the bypaths of error, and to guide our feet in the way of peace 
(h) Luk. 1.79. . By his Kingdom or his Regal power to prescribe us laws; protect us from our enemies, and make us at the last partakers of his heavenly Kingdom. jeremy's King, David's Priest, Moses Prophet; but in each and all respects the CHRIST. Not that he was anointed with material oil as were the Kings and Priests in the Old Testament: but with the Oil of gladness above his fellows, Psal. 45.7. but with the Spirit of the Lord, wherewith he was anointed to preach good tidings to the meek, Esai. 61.1. which he applied unto himself, Luk. 4.18.21. anointed with the holy Ghost and with power, as St. Peter telleth us, Act. 10.38. Anointed then he was to those several Offices, and in that the CHRIST. But how he doth perform these Offices, and at what times he was inaugurated to the same, shall be declared in the course of the following Articles, which relate to him: save that we shall refer the Execution of the Prophetical function to the Article of the holy Ghost, by the effusion of whose gifts on the Pastors and Ministers of the holy Church it is most powerfully discharged.  
The Name of CHRIST as it is commonly added unto that of JESUS to denote his Offices: so in a sort it is communicated unto those whom he hath chosen to himself for a royal Priesthood, a chosen generation, a peculiar people 
(k) 1 Pet. 2 9 ; and for that reason honoured with the name of Christians. And the Disciples were called▪ Christians first at Antioch 
(l) Act. 11.26. , saith the book of the Acts. Called Christians, what by chance? I believe not that. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used in the Original, hath more in it then so. We have the same word in the second of St. Matthews Gospel, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, speaking of the Wise men that came from the East to worship CHRIST; and there we render it, that they were warned by God 
(m) Mat. 2.12. , warned by him in a dream, not to go to Herod: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then in this place of the Acts, must have some reference to God; and seems to intimate at least, if not fully evidence, that they took not this name upon themselves, but by God's direction. The jews had formerly called them Nazarites (as the Mahometans do still) in the way of reproach. And though the Disciples were neither ashamed nor afraid of any ignominy which was put upon them for the sake of their Lord and Master: yet they conceived it far more honourable to him, into whose heavenly house and family they were adopted, to own themselves by that name which might most entitle them to all those privileges which did accrue unto them in the right of Adoption. A caution to which God more specially might incline their hearts, that his dear CHRIST might look upon them as his own, to whom he gave the unction or anointing of the holy Spirit. The anointing which ye have received of him (saith the beloved Disciple) abideth in you, and ye need not that any men teach you 
(n) 1 Joh. 2.27. : That God had a directing hand in it the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth persuade me, which intimates at least some secret influence in the work, if not a public and Oracular admonition. And that it was not done but upon serious consultation had amongst themselves, and a devout invocation of the name of God, the greatness of the business, the piety of the first Professors, and other good authorities do most strongly assure. For if upon the naming of john the Baptist there was not only a consultation held by the friends and mother, but the dumb father called to advise about it 
(o) Luk. 1.62. : and if we use not to admit the poorest child of the parish into the Congregation of Christ's Church by the door of Baptism, but by joint invocation of the Name of God for his blessings in it: with how much more regard of ceremony and solemnity may we conceive that the whole body of Christ's people were baptised into the name of Christians? But besides this we have an evidence or record sufficient to confirm the truth of our affirmation. For Suidas, and before him johannes Antiochenus an old Cosmographer, first tells us, that in the reign of Claudius Caesar, ten years after the Ascension of our Lord into Heaven, Euodius received Episcopal consecration, and was made Patriarch of Antioch the great, in Syria, succeeding immediately to St. Peter the Apostle 
(p) Cited by Gregory in his Obseru. 36. . And then he adds, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. i. e. And at this time the Disciples were first called Christians, Euodius calling them to a solemn conference, and putting this new name upon them. For before they were called Nazarites, and Galileans. Some of the Heathens not knowing the Etymon of the name called them Chrestiant: and our most blessed Saviour by the name of Chrestos. For thus Tertullian of the Christians, perperam a vobis Christianus appellatur 
(r) Tertul. Apol c. 3. : and thus Lactantius for our Saviour, qui eum immutata litera 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 solent dicere 
(s) Lact. l. 4.7. . But this was only on mistake, not on studied malice, Et propter ignorantium errorem, as Lactantius hath it: the very name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Chrestianus, intimating nothing else but meekness and sweetness, as Tertullian very well observeth. And though Suetonius following the errors of the times, calleth our Saviour CHRIST by the name of Chrestos 
(t) Sueton. in vita Claudii. , yet Tacitus who lived in the same age with him, hits right as well on Christus, as on Christianus. Quos vulgo Chrestianos' appellabat. And then he addeth, Auctor nominis ejus Christus, qui Tiberio imperitante per Procuratorem Pontium Pilatum supplicio affectus erat 
(u) Tacit. Annal. l. 15. . Having thus rectified the name and asserted it to its true Original, we may do well to have a care that we disgrace not the dignity of so high a calling by the unworthiness and uncleanness of our lives and actions. In nobis patitur Christus opprobrium, in nobis patitur lex Christiana maledictum 
(x) Salvian de gubern. Dei. ; that Christ and Christianity were ill spoken of, by reason of the wicked lives of Christian people; was the complaint of Salvians time. God grant it be not so in ours. And God grant too, that as we take our name from CHRIST, so the like mind may be in us as was also in him 
(y) Phillip 2.5. , that is to say, that we be as willing to lay down our lives for the brethren (especially in giving testimony to his Faith and Gospel) as he was willing to lay down his life for us: and that as his Father's love to him, brought forth in him the like affections towards us, and to his Commandments; so his affection unto us may work in us the like love towards our brethren, and to all his precepts. For hereby shall men know we are his Disciples, if we abide in his love and keep his Commandments, as he hath kept his Father's Commandments, and abide in his love 
(z) Joh. 15.10. . But see how I am carried to these practical matters, if not against my will, yet besides my purpose. I proceed now to that which followeth.    

ARTICULI 3. Pars 2da. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. i e. Filium ejus unicum, Dominum nostrum. i e. His only Son our Lord.  

CHAP. II. That JESUS CHRIST is the Son of God; why called his only or his only begotten Son. Proofs for the Godhead of our Saviour. Of the title of Lord.  
THat which next followeth is the first of those two Relations in which we do behold our Saviour in this present Article; his only Son; i. e. the only Son of God the Father Almighty, whom we found spoken of before. That God had other sons in another sense, there is no question to be made. All mankind in some sense may be called his sons; The workmanship of his creation. Have we not all one Father? hath not one God created us 
(a) Mal. 2.10. ? saith the Prophet Malachi in the Old Testament. Our Father which art in Heaven, saith Christ our Saviour for the New 
(b) Matth. 6.9. . The Saints and holy men of God are called his sons also in the more peculiar title of adoption. For who else were the sons of God in the 6. of Genesis, who are said to take them wives of the daughters of men 
(c) Gen. 6.2. , but the posterity of Seth, the righteous seed, by and amongst whom hitherto the true worship of the Lord had been preserved? More clearly the Evangelist in the holy Gospel; To as many as received him gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them which believed in his Name 
(d) Joh. 1.12. . Most plainly the Apostle saying, As many as are led by the Spirit of God are the sons of God, having received the Spirit of Adoption, whereby they cry to him Abba, Father 
(e) Rom. 8.14, 15. . And in this sense must we understand those passages of holy Scripture, where such as are regenerate and made the children of God by adoption of grace, are said to be born of God, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(f) Joh. 1.13. & 1 Joh. 3.9. , as john's phrase is, both in his Gospel and Epistle. Not that they have the Lord God for their natural Father, (for so he is the Father only of our Lord jesus Christ) but because being begotten by immortal seed, the seed of his most holy Word, they are regenerate and born again unto life eternal. This is the seed of God spoken of by St. john, which remaineth in us; by which we are begotten to an inheritance immortal, undefiled and that fadeth not away, reserved for us in the Heavens 
(g) 1 Pet. 1.4. , as St. Peter tells us. In neither of these two respects can we consider Christ as the Son of God. For if he were the Son of God in no other respect, then either in regard of Creation or Adoption only: he could not possibly be called Gods only Son, or his only begotten Son, but at the best, multis e millibus unus, one of the many thousands of the sons of God.  
There is a more particular title by which some more selected vessels both of grace and glory, have gained the honourable appellation of the sons of God: that is to say, by being admitted to a clearer participation and fruition of eternal bliss; or made more intimately acquainted with his secret will. In the first of these respects the blessed Angels have the title of the sons of God. Where wast thou (saith the Lord in the book of job) when I laid the foundation of the earth, when the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy 
(h) Job. 38.4.6. ? The sons of God, that is to say, the holy Angels Per filios Dei, Angeli intelliguntur, saith the learned Estius on the place. And so St. Augustine doth determine, who hereupon inferreth that the Angels. were created before the stars; and not after the six days were finished, as some it seems had taught in the times before him: jam ergo erant Angeli quando facta sunt sydera, facta sunt autem sydera die quarto, 
(i) Aug. de Civ. dei. l. 11. c. 9 , as he most rationally concludes from this very text. In this respect also the Saints in glory are called the sons or children of God, and said to be equal to the Angels in St. Luke's Gospel 
(k) Luk. 20.36. : not that they have all the prerogatives and properties which the Angels have; sed quod mori non possunt, saith the text, but because they are become immortal, and no longer subject (as before) to the stroke of death. In the last meaning of the word, though all the Saints and holy men of God may be called his children, because they are adopted to the right of sons, and made coheirs with CHRIST their most blessed Saviour: yet is the title more appliable to the Prophets of God, at least appliable unto them after a more peculiar manner, then unto any others of the children of men. I have said, saith David, ye are Gods, and ye are all the children of the most High 
(l) Psal. 82.6. . Of whom here speaks the Psalmist, of God's people generally, or only of some chosen and select vessels? Not of God's people generally, there's no doubt of that, though both St. Augustine and St. Cyril seem to look that way; but of some few particulars only, as Euthymius, and some others with more reason think. And those particulars must either be the Princes and Judges of the earth, who are called Gods by way of participation, because they do participate of his power in government: or else the Prophets of the Lord, who are called Gods, and the sons or children of the most High, by way of communication, because God doth communicate and impart to them his more secret purposes, that they might make them known to the sons of men. Them he called Gods, as Christ our Saviour doth expound it, (than whom none better understood the meaning of the royal Psalmist) ad quos sermo dei factus est, i. e. to whom the word of the Lord came 
(m) Joh. 10.35. , as our English reads it. And what more common in the Scripture than this form of speech, factum est verbum Domini, etc. The word of the Lord came to Isaiah, Isa. 38.4. The word of the Lord came to jeremiah, jer. 1.2. The word of the Lord came to Ezekiel, Ezek. 1.3. et sie de caeteris. If then such men to whom the word of the Lord came, might justly be entitled by the name of Gods, and called the sons of the most High; assuredly there was not any of the children of men which could with greater reason look to be so called, than the holy Prophets. And yet in none of these respects abstracted from an higher consideration, is CHRIST our Saviour here called by the name of the Son of God, or so intended in this Creed. For Angel he was none in the proper signification of the word; though called the Angel of the Covenant in the way of Metaphor. Nor did he take the nature of Angels, but the seed of Abraham 
(o) Heb. 2.16 , as St. Paul tells us to the Hebrews. We may not think so meanly of him, as to rank him only in the list of the Saints departed: it being through the merits of his death and passion, that the Saints are made partakers of the glories of heaven, and put into an estate of immortality. 'tis true indeed he was a Prophet, the Prophet promised to succeed in the place of Moses 
(p) Act. 7.37.  that Prophet, in the way of excellence, in the first of john v. 21, 25. But then withal, as himself telleth us of john the Baptist, he was more than a Prophet 
(q) Mat. 11.9. , that word which came unto the Prophets in the times of old, and to whom all the Prophets did bear witness, for the times to come. A King indeed he is, even the King of Kings, though not considered in that notion here upon the earth, nor looked on in that title in the present Article. Or if we could reduce him unto any of these; yet take him as an Angel, or a Saint departed, or a King, or Prophet, every of which have the name of Sons in the book of God: he could not be his only Son, the only begotten Son of God the Father Almighty, who hath so many Saints and Angels, so many Kings and Prophets, which are called his Sons.  
It must needs follow hereupon that JESUS CHRIST our Lord is the Son of God, by a more divine and near relation, then hath been hitherto delivered. And hereunto both God and Man, the Angels and internal spirits, give sufficient testimony. The Lord from heaven procliamed him at his Baptism 
(r) Mat. 3. , and Transfiguration 
(s) 17.5. , to be his well beloved Son, in whom he was well pleased: And Peter on the earth, having made this acknowledgement and confession, saying, Thou art Christ the Son of the living God 
(t) 16. v. 16, 17. ; received this confirmation from our Saviour's mouth, that flesh and blood had not revealed it unto him, but that it came from God the Father which is in Heaven. The Angel Gabriel when he brought the news of his incarnation, foretold his mother that he should be called the Son of God 
(u) Luk. 1.35, 32. , the Son of the most High, in a former verse. And a whole Legion of unclean Spirits in the man possessed, joins both of these together in this compellation, JESUS thou Son of God most high 
(x) Luk. 9.28. . A thing not worthy so much noise and ostentation, had he not been the Son of God in another and more excellent manner, than any of the sons of men who either lived with him, or had gone before him: had there not been something in it extraordinary, which might entitle him unto so sublime and divine a privilege. Though john the Baptist were a Prophet, yea and more than a Prophet, yet we do not find that the Devils stood in awe of him, (for john the Baptist did no miracles 
(y) Joh. 10.41. ) or looked upon him in the wilderness, as the Son of God. To which of all the holy Angels (as St. Paul disputes it) did the Lord say at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee 
(a) Heb. 1.5. ? And who can show us any King but him that was the Son of God as well as of David, whom God the Lord advanced to so high an honour, as to cause him to sit down at his own right hand, till his enemies were made his footstool 
(b) Psal. 110.1. . Though Angels, Kings and Prophets were the sons of God, by a communication of more special Grace, than had been granted generally to the sons of men: yet none but CHRIST our Lord is honoured with those high prerogatives, of being called his own Son 
(c) Rom. 8.32. , his only Son 
(d) Mar. 3.17. , his only begotten Son 
(e) Joh. 3.16. , the first born of every Creature 
(f) Col. 1.15. , the first born from the dead 
(g) Col. 1.18. , and the heir of all things 
(h) Heb. 1.2. , that so in all things he might have the pre-eminence. Which glorious attributes and titles being laid together, do put a very signal and material difference between the sons of God by adoption, and grace, and JESUS CHRIST our Lord and most blessed Saviour, who is his son by nature, his begotten Son, begotten by his Father before all times, generatione 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by an unspeakable manner of generation without help of woman▪ and yet made of a woman in the fullness of time, generatione 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by a supernatural kind of generation without help of man. In terris sine Patre, in coelis sine Matre, as it is in Origen, Without a Father on the earth, without a Mother in heaven; the very true Melchisedech which hath no descent 
(k) Heb. 7.3.  who neither had beginning of days, as the Son of God the Father alone; nor shall have any end of life, as he is the Son of God and the Virgin Mary.  
Now of this twofold generation of the Son of God, we will first speak of that which is last in Order, his generation in the womb of the Virgin Mary, in which he was incarnate by the holy Ghost, and was made flesh and dwelled amongst us 
(l) Joh. 1.14.  for a season, that we might live with him for ever. For being begotten and conceived in the Virgin's womb, after such a supernatural and wonderful manner, by the Almighty power of God, he is in that regard (if there were no other) Gods own Son, or his son by nature, his only and his only begotten Son, take which phrase we will. The Angel Gabriel doth affirm this twice for failing. Behold, thou shall conceive and bring forth a Son, and shalt call his name Jesus; he shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest 
(m) Luk. 1.31, 32, 35. . And then unto the Virgins Quaere he returns this answer, 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 born of thee shall be called the Son of God. What? called the Son of God only, and not be so really? Not so, but that being really and truly the Son of God, he shall declare the same by such several means, ut sic merito ab omnibus vocetur 
(n) Estius in Luk. 1. , that so he shall be called and counted over all the world. For that he was really and truly the Son of God, by this his generation in the fullness of time, the miraculous manner of his conception, without any other Father then the power of God, doth most assuredly evince. A son begotten in that manner, may very well be called, natura filius, non tantum beneficio filius 
(o) Maldon. in Luk. 1.31. , a son by nature, not by grace and indulgence only, saith the learned Maldonate. Quia non ex viro, sed ex solo Deo concipiendus, because begotten not by man, but by God alone. Nay so peculiarly doth this miraculous manner of his generation entitle him to be the true and proper Son of Almighty God, that so he might be justly called and accounted of, had he not been the Son of the living God, by a preceding generation even before all times. And so doth Maldonate resolve it in his Commentaries on St. Luke's Gospel, though otherwise a great assertor of the eternal generation of the Son of God: whose words I shall put down at large for the greater certainty 
(p) Id. in Luk. 1.35. : Etiamsi Christus Deus non fuisset, illo tamen modo genitus quo genitus fuit, merito Dei Filius vocatus fuisset, non solum ut caeteri viri sancti, sed singulari quadam ratione, quod non alium quam Deum haberet patrem, neo ab alio quam ab eo generatus. So he, I think exceeding rightly to the point in hand. His instance or exemplification in the case of Adam, who is called the Son of God by the same St. Luke 
(q) Luk. 3.38. , quia non a viro sed a Deo genitus erat, because he was begotten by God and not by Man, I cannot by any means approve of: the production of our Father Adam, not being to be reckoned as a generation, but to be esteemed of as a work of Creation only. But to proceed, as Christ is properly and truly the Son of God, by this his generation in the womb of his Virgin-mother: so in the same respect is he called in Scripture, the only, and the only begotten Son of God the Father. I know that generally the style or attribute of the only begotten Son of God, is used for an argument or convincing reason to prove that Christ our Saviour is the Son of God by an eternal generation long before all worlds. But by their favours I conceive, that he is called Gods only begotten Son, either in reference to this his generation in the womb of the Virgin, because the only Son of God which was so begotten; or else because he was most dearly loved of his heavenly Father, as commonly an only Son is best and most affectionately beloved of an earthly Parent. To the first sense I have the testimony of Vrsinus, a Divine of the reformed Churches, who though he hold that CHRIST is principally called the only begotten Son of God, secundum divinitatem suam, according to his Divine nature: yet he concludes that aliquatenus, after a sort he may be called so in his humane nature 
(r) Vrsin. Catech. pt. 1. q. 33. . His reason is, Quia etiam secundum hane tali modo est genitus, quali nunquam quisquam alius, ex Virgin nimirum incorrupta vi Spiritus sancti; that is to say, because according to that nature he was begotten in such a manner as never any had been before or since, as being conceived of a pure Virgin by the holy Ghost. And to the second sense I have that of Maldonate, who on these words, Hic est filius meus dilectus, in the 3. of Matthew, observes that filius dilectus and filius unigenitus, are terms reciprocal 
(t) Maldon. in Mat. 3.17. : that not alone in Homer, but in holy Scripture, the best beloved Son, is called the only begotten, and on the other side, that by only begotten in St. john he means best beloved. God so loved the world that he sent his only begotten Son; that is to say, his best beloved Son. For unigenitum posuit pro charissimo, as his words there are. But what need Maldonate be produced in so clear a case, which hath so plain an evidence from the word of God? For read we not that God commanded Abraham, to offer his only son Isaac, as our English reads it 
(u) Gen. 22.2. , unigenitum filium tuum, the only begotten Son as the Vulgar hath it. So the Greek reads it also, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (which is the word used of Christ, in the present Article) in the 11. Chap. to the Hebrews, vers. 17. And yet we know that Abraham had another son, a son whom he had circumcised by Gods own command, of whom twelve Princes were to come, and whom God promised to make a puissant Nation 
(x) Gen. 17.20. . And therefore Isaac must be called his only son, because preferred before the other in the love of his Father. Filius tuus unigenitus, i e. filius quem diligis; Isaac thine only son, that is to say, the son whom thou only lovest, as there the text, without the help of commentator doth expound itself. And if the name of unigenitus or Gods only Son, may warrantably be applied to Christ in his humane nature, there is not much question to be made but that in the very same capacity, he may be called filius proprius or Gods own Son 
(y) Rom. 8.33. , (He spared not his own Son) by which name he occurreth in St. Paul to the Romans.  
Less question is there to be made, or indeed no question, but that according to the same humane nature, and in relation to his being begotten in the fullness of time, he is entitled in the Scriptures the first born of every Creature 
(z) Col. 1.15, 18.  the first born from the dead, and the heir of all things: though there be something in those titles which doth require a further consideration. For first, his being called the first born of every Creature, gives no encouragement at all to the Arian factions to make the Son of God a created essence; no more than Kings may be called creatures of the people's making, because called an ordinance of man (humana creatura 
(a) 1 Pet. 2.13. , in the Vulgar latin) in the holy Scripture. The reason why our Saviour is there called by the Apostle Primogenitus omnis Creaturae, or the first born of every Creature, is neither to give him the precedency of all Creatures else, or to rank his whole Person in the list of created substances: but either to entitle him to the rights of Primogeniture, which were great amongst the sons of men, or to denote that he supplied the place of the first begotten, and was the general ransom or redemption for them. Concerning which we may take notice that by the Law of Moses the first that opened the matrix of all living Creatures, were holy and cousecrated to the Lord 
(b) Exod. 13.1 &c, & v. 11, 12. : if of clean beasts, then to be offered up in kind to the Lord their God, but if of men or unclean Creatures, then either to be redeemed for a piece of money, or some clean beast was to be brought unto the Lord in exchange for it; as in the case of the first male child, a pair of Turtle doves, or two small Pigeons. The reason was, because the Lord having slain the first born of Egypt both of man and beast, had spared all the first born of the house of Israel; and therefore he required the first male of every Creature to be offered to him in sacrifice, that so the whole offspring might be sanctified and made useful to them. But being the offering of a dumb Creature was really and of itself no sufficient price for the redemption of the first male child which opened the Matrix nor able to sanctify both male and female in every family to the Lord their God (for he that sanctifyeth and they that are sanctified must be all of one 
(c) Heb. 2.11. , as the Apostle doth infer): therefore did CHRIST take upon himself the place of stead of the first born, that being offered unto God, the clean for the unclean, he might sanctify all things unto God, and make them acceptable in the sight of their Lord and maker, which were of a nature capable of such sanctification and acceptance as the Lord requireth in his creature. Now as the ransom of the first born was discharged by him; so was it just that all the rites of Primogeniture should belong unto him; which were the Principality, the Priesthood, and the double portion. Those Reuben having forfeited by his great offence, were so distributed amongst his Brethren, that the Priesthood was bestowed on Levi, the Principality on judah, the double portion upon joseph, who thereupon was branched into the two tribes of Ephraim and Manasses. But they were all again united in the person of CHRIST, that being thus made the first born of every Creature, he might in all things have the pre-eminence. The Principality he had, for the Lord gave unto him the throne of his Father David 
(d) Luk. 1.32. ; the Priesthood, for he was a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedech 
(e) Ps. 110.4. ; the double portion, for all power was given unto him both in heaven and earth 
(f) Mat. 28.18. . In all respects the first borne of every Creature; but how the first born from the dead, which is another of the titles given by the Apostle, considering we find many examples of men that had been raised from the dead before his resurrection, both in the old Testament and in the new. The answer to this doubt is easy. For though those mentioned in both Testaments were for a time raised from death to life; yet were they raised to die again, as in fine they did. But to be primogenitus ex mortuis, the first born or first begotten from the powers of death, includes an everlasting freedom from the jaws thereof: in which regard the Scripture saith of Christ, and of Christ alone, that being risen from the dead he now dyeth not, death hath no more power or dominion over him 
(g) Rom. 6.9. . But of this Privilege we shall speak more at large hereafter in its proper place. That which remains is that he was heir of all things, Heb. 1.2. to the intent that he might prove himself for the Son of Abraham, the promised seed, in whom all the nations of the world are blessed. The promise which was made to Abraham 
(h) Rom. 4.13. , that he should be heir of the world, was never verified in his person, nor in any of his posterity neither till the coming of CHRIST. Who being begotten by the power of Almighty God on a daughter of the seed of Abraham, and having the nations given him for his inheritance, as had been prophesied before by his Father David: might properly be entitled the heir of all things according to the rights of his humane nature, which nature he derived from David the son of Abraham.  
Thus have we shown how CHRIST is properly and truly the Son of God, his natural and only begotten Son, according to his generation in the fullness of time: without relating to his generation before all time was. But yet we must not give off here. For by this generation in the fullness of time, he was not only the Son of God, but so the Son of God, after such a manner, as that he was also the son of man. But by his generation before all times, he was not only the Son of God, but so the Son of God, after such a manner, that he was also God himself, God for ever blessed; Deus in secula brnedictus, as St. Paul calleth him in the 9 Chap. to the Romans vers. 5. Deus in carne manifestatus, God manifested in the flesh 
(i) 1 Tim. 3.16. , in the first to Timothy. St. john speaks home unto the point, and doth more puzzle the Socinian and Arian heretics then all the book of God besides. In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God 
(k) Joh. 1.1.  In the beginning, when was that? When God created first the heaven and the earth 
(l) Gen. 1.1, ●. ; when the earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep: then the word was, that is to say, it had a perfect actual being when all things else did but begin to be; and having then an actual and a proper being, it could not at that time, nor at any time since, begin to be, but was, and is, and so continueth without ending. In the beginning was the word; what word? that word by which the worlds were made 
(m) Heb. 1.2. , as St. Paul hath it; by whom all things were made, saith St. john 
(n) Joh. 1.3. , and without which nothing was made, saith the same Evangelist. The word which after was made flesh, and did dwell amongst us, and by the brightness of his glory did declare himself to be the only begotten Son of the Father, joh. 1. The express image of his person, Heb. 1.3. the image of the invisible God, Col. 1.15. That word in the beginning was, and was God the word: the Son of God, not by communication of grace but nature: therefore the natural Son of God, but so the Son of God, his begotten Son, as to be very God, for the word was God. The Word was God, saith the Apostle, not only by a participation of power, or communication of a more abundant measure of his graces, in which respects some of the Sons of Men are called Gods in Scripture; Ego dixi, Dii estis, saith the royal Psalmist: but properly and truly God, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the very true God, and the Son of God. We know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding that we may know him that is true. And we are in him that is true, even in his son Jesus Christ, who is the true God and the life eternal 
(q) 1 Joh. 5.20.  saith the same Apostle. Here have we CHRIST the Son of God, and CHRIST the true God both in one; and what need further evidence in a point so clear?  
Such further Topics as are used for the proof hereof, from the names given him in the Scripture, the attributes and mighty works ascribed unto him, and the company of such texts in the book of God as being spoken of the Father in the old Testament, are applied in the new unto the Son, I purposely forbear at present: and shall content myself with such ample testimonies, which CHRIST himself hath given to his own Divinity. For though it be an unusual thing, to admit a man's own testimony in his own cause, according unto that of our Lord and Saviour, If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true 
(r) Joh. 5.31. ; that is to say, it would not pass for currant, or be taken for truth: yet when a man lieth under any accusation, he may then speak what he can in defence of himself, and his testimony be allowed of towards his acquitment or justification. And therefore Christ our Saviour being challenged by the Pharisees, who were apt to cavil at his sayings, for speaking in his own behalf, returned this answer 
(s) Joh. 8.14. ; Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true. Upon this ground than we proceed, and though it be the last in order of our Saviour's life, yet we will first allege that passage, which happened in the high Priests hall on the day of his passion. The high Priest finding no sufficient testimony for his condemnation resolved to put him to the oath of ex officio, and therefore did adjure him by the living God, to tell them whether he were the Christ the Son of God; 
(t) Mat. 26.63.  to which our Saviour answered, saying, Thou hast said. Which though it be equivalent to an affirmation, yet to make sure work of it and put it out of doubt, St. Mark hath given his answer in these positive terms, jesus said I am 
(u) Mar. 14.62. . In which it is to be observed, that when the high Priests put our Saviour to this dangerous question, he spoke not of the Son of God in that vulgar sense, in which the just and righteous persons were called his sons, but of the Son of God in the natural sense, in which he could not verify himself for the Son of God, without including necessarily that he was also God. As in the 5. Chap. of St. john, where our Saviour having said, My Father worketh hitherto, and I also work 
(x) Joh: 5.17, 18. ; the incensed jews intended him some present mischief, not only because he had broken the Sabbath, but had said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God. And this appears yet further by the following words, where it is said, that the high Priest rend his clothes, saying, he hath spoken blasphemy 
(y) Mat. 26.65, 66. ; and thereupon pronounced him to be guilty of death: which vote, they after prosecuted before Pontius Pilate, affirming that he ought to die by the Law of Moses, because he had made himself the Son of God 
(z) Joh. 19.7. . Assuredly their meaning was, that he had made himself the true and natural Son of God, and not the Son of God by especial grace: for otherwise they had not voted him to be guilty of death. Nor had the high Priest rend his clothes, if he had only taken upon himself the name of CHRIST, or of the Messiah, because that could not come within the compass of Blasphemy. For they knew well that the Messiah or the Christ was to come in the form of man; though with more outward pomp and glory (as they supposed) than our Saviour did: and therefore though they might have condemned him of folly, in that being a man of no reputation he had taken on himself the name of CHRIST; they had no reason in the world to accuse him of Blaspheming the name of God. Now that the Messiah was to come in the form of man, being he was to come of the woman's seed, was a thing so perfectly resolved on, that Eve immediately on the promise made, that her seed should bruise the Serpent's head 
(a) Gen. 3.15. , supposed that Cain her first born was to be the man, and therefore said upon his birth, I have gotten a man (or rather the man) from the Lord 
(b) 4.2. . Possedi virum ipsum Jehovah, I have gotten a man even the Lord Jehovah, as Fagius the learned Hebrician (upon several revises) readeth it 
(c) Fagius in Gen. 4. . The like conceit possessed the Parents of Noah, as many good Authors do conceive; upon which ground they said, when they gave him that name, this same (that is, this son of ours) shall comfort us concerning our work 
(d) Gen. 5.29. . Nor had the very jews of our Saviour's time sent to inquire of john the Baptist, whether he were the Christ whom they did expect but that they knew he was to come in an humane shape, and that it was no Blasphemy to own that title.  
So then the quarrel which the jews had against our Saviour was, that he called himself the Son of God in the literal and natural signification of the word. And this appears more plainly yet, not only by a former passage where they sought to slay him, because he said that God was his Father, making himself thereby to be equal with God 
(f) Joh. 5.1. ; but by a solemn conference which they had on the like occasion. In which our Saviour did not only own himself to be the CHRIST, and to claim God to be his Father in the proper sense of the word Father 
(g) Joh. 10.24, 25. & 29.30.33. , but added further an expression more unpleasing to them, saying, I and my Father are one. For which when the jews took up stones to stone him, and were demanded for which of his many good works they were so resolved; they answered thus, For a good work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy, because thou being a man makest thyself God. It seems the jews were of opinion that none could properly and naturally be the Son of God, or so call himself, but he must make himself to be also God: or else their accusation had been falsely grounded. And if our Saviour had not known himself to be very God, as well as his natural, proper, and begotten Son, he ought so far to have consulted the honour of God, as to have traversed the indictment, refeled the ill-grounded crimination, and told them plainly this, that he was not GOD, but wronged exceedingly by them in so false an inference; which the Logic of his discourse would by no means bear. For if john Baptist, 
(e) Joh. 1.20, 25.  being asked on the like occasion, denied himself to be the MESSIAH, and said plainly, I am not the Christ 
(h) Joh. 1.20. : and if Paul and Barnabas, when the Lystrians would have offered sacrifice unto them, rend their clothes, and said, Sir● why do ye these things 
(i) Act. 14.15. ? we are men of like passions with yourselves: how much more was our Saviour bound to have done the like, and not to let the jews run on in their misperswasion? But our Redeemer doth not so. He lets them peaceably enjoy their opinion of him, that is to say, that by calling God his Father, he had made himself God, and doth not go about to persuade them otherwise. Only he laboureth to take off the edge of their malice towards him, by telling them that according to the grounds of their own Law, it was no such heinous or unpardonable crime, for men to call themselves by the name of God 
(k) Joh. 10.35, 36. . And if they were called Gods in Scripture, to whom the word of God came, as it did to the Prophets, and called so without any offence that was taken at it: with how much better reason might he call himself the Son of God, even in that sense wherein they understood his words, without incurring either the sin or punishment of Blasphemy? This is the sum of the discourse between Christ and the malicious jews in the tenth of St. john: and this doth evidently prove that CHRIST did so affirm himself to be the Son of God the Father, as that he would by no means deny himself to be God the Son. Add unto this, that in another Dialogue betwixt him and the jews, he took unto himself the name, I am. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Antequam Abraham fieret, ●go●sum, saith the Vulgar Latin, that is to say, Before Abraham was (made or born) I am 
(l) 1 Joh. 8.58. . Which being the very self same name by which God calleth himself in the book of Exodus, saying, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you 
(m) Exod. 3.14. , may serve for a concluding Argument, that as CHRIST was not ashamed to call himself the son of man, so neither was he afraid to own himself for the Son of God, and so to be the Son of God, as to be also true God, God for ever blessed.  
Thus have I done with such Records and evidence of holy Scripture which are intrinsecal to this cause, and have been chosen by me out of a greater number, with reference to the limitations fixed to my design. Some other evidence there is, which I count extrinsical, because borrowed from the writings of jews, Greeks, and Romans; no friends unto the cause, if not open enemies. And first beginning with the jews, we find this testimony given to our Lord and Saviour, by josephus the Historian, that it was hardly lawful to call him a man, and in the close of all, that he was the CHRIST. Erat eodem tempore Jesus quidam, etc. There lived (saith he) one JESUS much about that time, a wise man, if at the least it be lawful to call him a man; For he did many miracles, and was a Teacher of those who do receive the truth with gladness; drawing many after him, both jews and Gentiles. This was the CHRIST 
(n) joseph. Antiqu. jud. l. 18. c. 4.  This said, he speaks in brief of his crucifying under Pontius Pilate, his resurrection from the dead on the third day after, and then concludes, Et ad hunc usque diem Christianorum gens ab eo cognominata non d●sinit, that the Sect of the Christians being denominated from him, continue to this very day. Though this be more than we have reason to expect from a jew, yet that of Thedosius which we find in Suidas, is more full than this. This Theodosius was a jew, living in the time of justinian the Emperor, justinian the Emperor having some acquaintance with one Philip a Christian Merchant told him a story to this purpose, viz. That there were in the Temple of Jerusalem 22 Priests in ordinary attendance, and that as often as one died another was chosen in his place: that JESUS in regard of his piety and learning was chosen into one of the void places, and his own name together with the name of his Parents being to be enrolled in the public Register, his Mother came to answer in that behalf; who being interrogated of his Father's name, reported the whole story of his incarnation, as she had heard from the Angel; and thereupon his Name was entered in these words, JESUS the Son of the living God and the Virgin Mary 
(o) Suidas in Lex. verb. jesus. . This Book or Register the same Theodosius doth report to have been carefully preserved in Tiberias a City of Galilee, after the destruction of Jerusalem; and that he had often seen and perused it there, he being one of the principal Citizens and of authority in that place. I know the truth of this relation hath been much disputed, in regard that our Redeemer was of the Tribe of judah, and so not capable of the Aaronical or Levitical Priesthood: Nor can I tell whether it will help the matter to report out of Ranulph the Monk of Chester 
(p) Polychron. l. 3. c. 44. , that Hismerias the Mother of Elizabeth which bore the Baptist, and Anna the Mother of the Virgin Mary were sisters, and the daughter of a Levite whose name was Isachar: This I am sure may be affirmed in defence of the story, that the jews were not then so punctual in keeping themselves unto their Tribes as they had been formerly; that even the High Priesthood itself had been bought and sold to persons both unworthy and uncapable of so high an honour: that we find JESUS to have preached in the Temple often, and to have done in it other Ministerial Offices, which questionless the Priests and Pharisees would never have suffered, had he not had some calling to it which might authorise him. And if by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Sacerdotes in the Text of Suidas we may have leave to understand some inferior Ministers, and not the very Priests themselves, (as possibly enough we may) the story may then stand secure, above all exceptions. Next let us look amongst the Gentiles, and they will tell us that Augustus the Roman Emperor, in whose time the Lord CHRIST was born, consulting with the Oracle of Apollo touching his successor, received this answer 
(q) Id. ibid. .  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉▪  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
In English thus, 
An Hebrew child whom the blessed Gods adore,  
Commands me leave these shrines, and back to Hell,  
So that of Oracles I can no more:  
In silence leave our Altars, and farewell.  Which answer being so returned Augustus built an Altar in the Roman Capitol, with this Inscription, ARA PRIMOGENITI DEI, i.e. the Altar of the first begotten of God. The general ceasing of Oracles much about this time, gives some strength to this. And so doth that which we find mentioned in Eusebius, touching the falling of the Idols of Egypt 
(r) Euseb. de Dem. Evangel. l. 9 , upon our Saviour's first coming into that country. St. Ambrose in his Commentary on the 119. Psalms, doth affirm as much. Nor is it yet determined to the contrary by our greatest Critics, but that the Prophet Esaiah may allude to this: where bringing in the burden of Egypt's, he saith, Behold the Lord rideth upon a swift cloud and shall come into Egypt, and the Idols of Egypt shall be moved at his presence 
(s) Esa. 19 1. . But whether the Prophet do allude unto this or not, we have no reason to misdoubt of the truth of the story, and the acknowledgement which the false Gods of the Gentiles made to the Divinity of the true. In and about these times lived the Poet Virgil, one of whose Eclogues, being a mere extract of some fragments of the Sibylline Oracles 
(t) Virg. Eclog. 6. , hath many passages which cannot properly be applied to any but our Saviour Christ; though by him wrested to the honour of Marcellus the Nephew and designed Heir of Augustus Caesar. For example these; 
jam redit & Virgo, redeunt Saturnia regna,  
jam nova progenes Coelo demittitur alto,  
Chara Deunt soboles, magnum jovis incrementum.   
Which may be Englished in these words, 
Now shines the Virgin, now the times of peace  
Return again, and from the Heaven on high  
Comes down a sacred and new Progeny,  
The issue of the Gods, Ioves blessed increase.  More testimonies of this nature might be added here; but these shall serve at this time for a taste of the rest. And so we end with that of the Centurion of pilate's guard, who noting all that happened in our Saviour's passion, could not but make acknowledgement of so great a Prophet, saying, 
(u) Ma●. 27.54.  Surely this was the Son of God. And this was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as much as could possibly be delivered in so few words.  
Which being so, it is the more to be admired that such as take unto themselves the name of Christians, should think and speak less honourably of their Lord and Saviour, than the jews, Gentiles, and the Devils themselves: yet such vile miscreants have there been in the former ages, and I doubt are still. And of those Ebion was the first, who savouring strongly of the jew, had made up such a mixture of Religion, as might please their palates: and taught no otherwise of CHRIST then that he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, an ordinary natural man, begotten in the common course of generation 
(x) Euseb. Eccl. hist. l. 3. cap. 4. . Eusebius so informs us of him. St. Hierome adds, that for the suppression of this heresy, St. john at the request of some Asian Bishops, wrote his holy Gospel, of purpose to assert the Divinity of CHRIST, (ut divinam ejus nativitatem ediceret, are St. Hieromes words) of which but little had been said by the other Evangelists. After him there arose up Artemon, or Artemas in the days of the Emperor Heliogabalus, who held the same opinion concerning CHRIST as the Ebionites did, affirming him to be no other than a mere natural man; saving that he was born of the Virgin Mary, after a more peculiar manner then the rest of mankind, and was to be preferred before all the Prophets 
(y) Niceph. Eccl. hist. l. 4. c. 20. . And against him there was a Book written, as Eusebius telleth us 
(z) Euseb. Eccl. hist. l. 5. c. 28. , though the name of the Author came not to his hands. But that which is a matter of most admiration, is that Paulus Samosatenus a Christian Bishop, & a Bishop of one of the four Patriarchal Sees, even of the City of Antioch, should not only set on foot again this condemned Heresy, but have the impudence to affirm that it had been the ancient and approved Doctrine of the Church of Christ 
(a) Id. ibid. . No wonder if the Prelates of the Church did best in themselves, when such a foul contagion was got in amongst them: and therefore they assembled in the City of Antioch, that by the authority of their presence, and the sincerity of their doctrine, so dangerous a Monster might be quelled in the face of his people 
(b) Id. l. 7. cap. 26, 27. etc. . This was about the time of the Emperor Aurelianus. Nor had there been a more celebrious Council in the Church of Christ, from that of the Apostles mentioned in the 15. of the Acts, unto that of Nice. The issue and success whereof was so blessed by God, that from those times until these last and worst ages of the Church, wherein Socinus, Osterodius, and their followers have again revived it, this wretched heresy was scarce heard of but in ancient Histories. And on the other side some of the ancient Writers, and the later Schoolmen, the better to beat down the dotages of such frantic Heretics, as had impugned the Divinity of our Lord and Saviour: have so entangled the simplicity of the Christian faith within the Labyrinth of curious and intricate speculations, that it became at last a matter of great wit and judgement, to know what was to be believed in the things of Christ. And of this nature I conceive are those inexplicable and perplexed discourses about the consubstantiality and coequality of the Persons; which how it can consist with the School-distinction, that the Father doth all things authoritative, and the Son all things sub-authoritative, it is hard to say: that the Son is coeternal with the Father, as in the Creed of At●anasius; and yet Principium a principio in the Schoolmens language: that there should be two distinct natures in the Person of CHRIST, and yet a communication of Properties (or Idioms as they call them) of the one nature to the other: that CHRIST in one Person should have two distinct wills, all who opined the contrary being branded and condemned by the name of Monothelites. Not to say any thing in this place of those dark expressions, in which the eternal generation of the Son of God, and the nature of the Hypostatical Union have been delivered by some Writers: of whom a man may say with a sober confidence that they hardly understood what they said themselves. Assuredly that ancient diverb, Ingeniosa res est esse Christianum, was not made for nought. The best way therefore is to contain ourselves within those bounds which are prescribed us in the Word of God, in which though all things are not written which concern our Saviour, yet those things which are written are sufficient doubtless to make us wise unto salvation 
(c) 1 Tim. , that so we may believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that believing we may have life through his Name 
(d) Joh. 20.31. .  
And now, as far as I can go by the light of Scripture, I should proceed unto the incarnation of the Son of God, but that we must first behold him as he is our LORD, which is the last of those two relations in which he is presented to us in this present Article. Of this as it belongeth to God the Father, we have already spoken in the first Article, under the title of jehovah, the proper and peculiar name of the Lord our God: a name so proper and peculiar to the Father of our Lord JESUS CHRIST, that it is thought by very learned men not to be understood of the Son of God, or of God the Son, in the whole Old Testament, who is most usually expressed by the name of Adonai. Thus in that celebrated place of the Psalms of David, whereas we read in English thus, the Lord said unto my Lord 
(e) Psal. 110.1. , it is in the Original thus, jehovah said to Adonai, or the Lord Jehovah said unto my Lord Adonai. Where clearly the name of jehovah, doth denote the Father, as that of Adonai the Son, though both be generally Englished by the name of Lord. Now the name Adonai is derived (as before was noted) from the Hebrew word Eden, which signifieth the basis or foundation on which the whole building doth rely: and therefore very fitly doth express his nature, by whom as all things were created in the first beginning, as St. john telleth us in his Gospel 
(f) Joh. 1.3. ; so doth he still support the Earth and the pillars of it, as it is told us in the Psalms. But for the name or style of Lord, both in Greek and Latin, it seemed to be a title of such power and sovereignty, that great Augustus, though the Master of the Roman Empire did forbear to use it. Nay which is more, gravissimo corripuit edicto 
(h) Sueton, August. Caesar. c. 52. , as Suetonius hath it, he interdicted the applying of it to himself by a public Edict. The like by Dion is reported of Tiberius also 
(i) Dion. hist. ; a Prince who cherished flattery more than any virtue, and in whose Court no men were more esteemed of then the basest sycophants. This by the Statists of those times imputed to policy or Kings-cra●t, ne speciem Principatus in Regni formam converterent 
(k) Sueton. hist. in Calig.  for fear they should be thought in that conjuncture of time, when their affairs were yet unsettled, to affect the title of Kings as they had the power; which was most odious to the Romans. But in my mind Orosius gives a better reason, who thinks that this was rather done by God's special Providence, then on any foresight of those Princes. His reason is, because that Christ during the reign of those two Emperors had took our flesh upon him, and did live amongst us. Nor was it fit, saith he, that any man should take upon himself the name of LORD, ex eo tempore, quo verus totius gene●is humani Dominus inter nos homines natus esset 
(l) Oros. hist. l. 6. c. 21. , whilst the undoubted Lord of all mankind, was conversant amongst us here upon the Earth. And this we may the rather credit to have been done by God's special providence, because Caligula who next succeeded in the Empire (our Saviour Christ having then withdrawn his bodily presence) was not alone content to admit this Title, but did command it to be given him by all the people. Et primus Dominum se jussit appellari 
(m) Vict. Roman. hist. Epitome. , as it is in Victor.  
But whether this observation of Orosius will hold good or not, certain it is, that from the time and instant of the Resurrection, the style of LORD did properly belong unto CHRIST our Saviour. Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same. Jes●s whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ 
(n) Act. 2.36. . Not made, that is to say, not declared LORD by his heavenly Father before that time, when he had overcome the sharpness of death, and trampled on the grave in his Resurrection; though called so sometimes before, in the way of Anticipation, or of civil compliment. Then only called, now made and publicly declared the Lord of all things. And certainly it might seem to stand with reason, that seeing all power was given to the man Christ Jesus, both in heaven and earth (for now we look upon him only in that capacity) that with the power he also should partake of the highest title, by which that power was usually expressed and signified. From that time forwards unto this, there is not any thing more ordinary in the Book of God, or in the Liturgies of the Church, or in the common speech of good Christian people, then to entitle our Redeemer by the name of the LORD; and to entitle him thereby in so clear a manner, as to make it more peculiar to him then to God the Father. So that in all the ancient Liturgies both Greek and Latin, when the name of God the Father and of God the Son occur in the same Prayer, or Hymn, as they often do; the name of Lord is constantly appropriated unto God the Son. And so we also find it in our English Liturgy. According to thy promises declared unto mankind in Christ Jesus our Lord; as in the general Confession: Almighty God, the Father of our Lord JESUS CHRIST, in the Absolution; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with thee and the holy Ghost, as in some of the Collects. And this the Church did learn, no doubt, from the like expression of St. Paul, who thus gives the blessing; The Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God (and not of the Lord God) and the fellowship of the holy Ghost, (and not of the Lord holy Ghost) be with you all, Amen 
(o) 2 Cor. 13.14. . And thus it also stands in the present Creed, in which the title of Lord is appropriated only to the Son; and neither added to the Father nor the holy Ghost.  
Nor is he called LORD only in general terms, but Dominus nosier, our Lord, the Lord of all that do confess his holy Name, and agree in the truth of his holy Word. A title which accrueth to him in many respects; as first in regard of our Creation. For if all things were made by him, and without him was nothing made that was made 
(p) Joh. 1.3. , as St. john affirmeth; If by him all things were created both in Heaven and Earth, visible and invisible 
(q) Col. 1.16. , as St. Paul informs us: good reason that he should have the Dominion over the work of his own hands, and that we should acknowledge him for the Lord our Maker 
(r) Psal. 95.6. . In the next place he is our Lord in jure Redemptionis, in the right of Redemption. Concerning which we must take notice (as before 
(s) V. l. 1. c.  was said) that man was made by God in his first Creation, just, righteous, and devoide of malice: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the words of Damascen 
(t) Damasc. de fid. Orth. l. 2.12. . Created to this purpose after Gods own Image, Vt imitator sui autoris esset, that so he might more perfectly imitate his Creator's goodness. But falling from this happiness in which he might have served the Lord with perfect innocency, he made a new contract with the Devil, and became his servant, and put himself directly under his dominion. Do ye not know (saith the Apostle) that unto whom you yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are whom ye obey 
(u) Rom. 6.16. . If then they were the Devils servants, the Devil of necessity was their Lord and Master; for Dominus & servus sunt relata, as our Logic teacheth us. A miserable and most wretched thraldom, from which there was no other way to set mankind free, but by the death and passion of our Saviour CHRIST: which he being willing for our sakes to undergo, did by the offering of himself once for all, become the propitiation for our sins 
(x) 1 Joh. 12.2. , and obtain eternal▪ redemption for us 
(y) Heb. 9.12. , cancelling the bond or obligation which was against us, and nailing it to his Cross for ever 
(z) Col. 2.14. . Nor were poor mankind only servants to this dreadful Tyrant, but for the most part they had listed themselves under him and became his soldiers, fight with an high hand of presumptuous wickedness against the Lord God and the Hosts of Heaven. And they continued in that service, taking part with the Devil upon all occasions, till he received his final overthrow at the hands of our Saviour: who by his death overcame him who had the power of death 
(a) Heb. 2.14. , which is the Devil: and having spoiled principalities and powers, made a show of them openly and triumphed over them 
(b) Col. 2.15. . By means whereof another title did accrue unto him of being the sole Lord over all mankind, and that is jure belli, by the laws of war: that rule of Aristotle being most unquestionably true, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(c) Arist. Pol. l. 1. c. 4. , that is to say, those which are taken in the wars, are in the power and at the disposal of the Conqueror. And by the same right also of successful war, men became servants unto him, whose service, as our Church hath taught us, is perfect freedom. For Servi are so called a servando, from being saved and preserved in the day of battle. Vocabuli origo inde ducta creditur, quod two qui jure belli possint occidi, a victoribus conservabantur 
(d) August. de civet. l. 19 , as St. Augustine from the Lawyers 
(e) justin. Instit. l. 1.  hath it; because although they might be slain by the Law of Arms, yet by the clemency of the Victor they were saved from slaughter, and so made servants to the Conqueror. And last of all he is our Lord jure Promotionis, by the right of promotion, because we hold of him all those temporal and eternal blessings, which we enjoy in this life, and expect in that which is to come. He is the Lord of Life, as St. Peter telleth us, Act. 3.15. the Lord of glory, saith S. Paul, 1 Cor. 2.8. the Lord of joy, Enter into the joy of the Lord, as St. Matthew hath it, 25.21. And he conferreth on us his servants life, joy, and glory, out of the abundant riches of his mercy towards us; and whatsoever else is his, within the title and power of Lord. For having thereto a double right, first by inheritance as the Son, whom God appointed heir of all things, Heb. 1.2. and then by purchase as a Redeemer, (for therefore he died and rose again that he might be Lord of all, Rom. 14.9.) contenting himself with the first alone he is well pleased to set over the latter unto us, and to advance us to an estate of joynt-purchase in Heaven, of life, joy, and glory, and whatsoever else he is owner of. For to that end it pleased him to come down from Heaven, and be made man, and be incarnate by the holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary; which is the first of those great works which were performed by him in order to our Redemption, and next in order of the Creed.    

ARTICLE IV. Of the Fourth ARTICLE OF THE CREED Ascribed to St. ANDREW. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. i e. Qui conceptus est de Spiritu sancto, natus ex Virgin Maria. i e. Which was conceived by the holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary.  

CHAP. III. Of God's free mercy in the Redemption of Man. The Word why fittest to effect it. The Incarnation of the Word why attributed to the holy Ghost. The miracle thereof made credible both to jews and Gentiles.  
IT is a very ingenious conceit of Cameracensis 
(a) Camerac. in 3. lib. sentent. , that when God first created Adam, he gave him all precious and excellent endowments; as truth to instruct him, justice to direct him, mercy to preserve him, and peace to delight him: but that when he was fallen from God, and forgot all the good which the Lord had done for him, they returned back to him that gave them, making report of that which had happened on the earth, and earnestly moving the Almighty, but with different purposes, concerning this forlorn and unhappy creature. For justice pleaded for his condemnation and called earnestly for the punishment which he had deserved: Truth pressing for the execution of that which God had threatened on his disobedience. But on the other side, Mercy entreated for poor miserable man made out of the dust of the earth, seduced by Satan, and beguiled under fair pretences; and Peace endeavoured to take off the edge of God's displeasure, and reconcile the creature unto his Creator. When God had heard the contrary desires and pleas of those excellent Orators, there was a council called of the blessed Trinity, in which it was finally resolved that the Word should be made flesh, and take unto himself the nature of Man, that he might partake of his infirmities, be subject to the punishments which man had deserved, and so become the propitiation for the sins of the world. By this means the desires of all parties were fully satisfied. For man was punished according as justice urged; the punishment threatened on man's disobedience inflicted, as Truth required; the offender pitied and relieved, as Mercy entreated; and God was reconciled to man, as Peace had desired. And so that was fulfilled which the Psalmist speaks of, Mercy and truth are met together, righteousness (or justice) and peace have kissed each other 
(b) Psal. 85.10. . Arminius followeth this conceit a little further, and adds that when the different parties had pursued their interesses, Wisdom was called on to advise what was best to be done, to give satisfaction to them all; whose advice was, that the punishment due to the sin of man should be changed into an Expiatory sacrifice, by the voluntary oblation of the which, justice might be appeased, and place made for mercy 
(c) Armin. in Orat. de Christi Sacerdutio. . But than began a new debate, where they should find a Priest fit for such a sacrifice; Angel it could not be, because it was not reasonable that an Angel should suffer for the sin of Man. And Man it could not be, because being terrified with the guilt of his own transgressions, he had not confidence enough to draw near to God; nor had he any thing of his own which was held worthy to be offered to so high a Deity. Wisdom was therefore called again, by whom it was finally resolved that there must be some man begotten, who being made in all things like unto his Brethren, might be the more sensible of their infirmities; but so, that he should be free from sin, and not obnoxious to the power and criminations of Satan. Holy he was to be, or rather holiness, and therefore to be conceived only by the holy Ghost, by whose great power the ordinary course of nature was to be supplied: and in this flesh the Word itself to be incarnate, who offering up that flesh in sacrifice for the sins of the world, might so perform the work of poor man's redemption.  
But leaving these conceits, though indeed very ingenious, there is no question to be made but God had other means to save us then by the incarnating the word, and humbling his only begotten Son unto the death, even the death of the Cross, if he had so pleased. But a better and more convenient way to demonstrate his love and mercy towards us, to manifest his Power and wisdom, and yet withal to show his justice against sin and Satan, the Scriptures have not laid before us. The Fathers have resolved it thus, Et ●ine hoc holocausto poterat Deus tantum condonasse peccatum, sed facilitas veniae peccatis laxaret habenas effraenatis quae etiam Christi vix cohibent passiones 
(d) Cyp. de Chr. Passione. . God (saith St. Cyprian) was able to have pardoned this great sin without this sacrifice; but the sacrifice of the pardon would have loosened the reins to unbridled sins, which even the sufferings of Christ, are scarce able to repress. The like saith Nazianzen, It was possible for God (saith he) to save man by his only will without taking of our flesh upon him, as he did and doth work all things without help of a body 
(e) Naz. Ep. 1.  Damascene to the same effect; He was not (otherwise) unable that can do all things by his Almighty power and strength to take man from the tyrant that possessed him 
(f) Damasc. de fide Orth. l. 3.18. . The like occurreth in St. Ambrose, St. Augustine, and Pope Gregory also. In the dark ages of the Chrurch the same truth was held. For thus St. Bernard in those times, Was not the Creator able to restore his work without this difficulty? Able he was, but he chose rather to wrong himself, than the most lewd and hateful vice of unthankfulness should find any colourable place in man 
(g) Bern. in Cant. Serm. 11. . And it holds also since the times of the reformation. Calvin affirms it in plain terms, Poterat nos Dominus verbo, aut nutu redimere, nisi aliter nostra causa visual esset 
(h) Calvin in Joh. 15.13. ; the Lord (saith he) might have redeemed us with a word or beck, but that for our sakes he thought good to do otherwise. Zanchius comes very close to Calvin, What (saith he) could not mankind be delivered by any other means then the death of Christ 
(i) Zanch. in c. 2 ad Philip. ? No doubt but that he might have done it, solo nutu, et jussu, et voluntate divina, by the only beck, commandment and will of God. Conform to which expression of the ancient and modern writers, the Church of England hath declared in the book of Homilies, that it was the surest pledge of God's love to man, to give us his own Son from Heaven. For otherwise he might have given us if he would an Angel or some other Creature; and yet in that his love had been far above our deserts 
(k) Homil. 2. of the Passion. . They who conceive that God was not able otherwise to effect this work, or had no other means to bring it to pass, then that which he made choice of to effect the same, do wilfully entrench upon his Omnipotence, which is larger than either his will or his works. For though his works be always measured by his will, yet must his Power be limited unto neither of them; because God is able to do many things which he never did, nor will do; as hath been shown before in the first Article. And in his works to bind him unto any necessity to do as he did, and not to leave him at his own liberty to do what he pleaseth; and in a way which seemeth most agreeable to his heavenly wisdom; were to revive the accursed error of the Manichees. Against whom St. Augustine thus resolveth it, Nullam ergo necessitatem patitur Deus, neque necessitate facit quae facit, sed summa et ineffabili voluntate ao potestate 
(l) Aug. de fide con. Man. c. 28. . God (saith the Father) is not bound by any necessity, nor is he necessitated to do those things which he doth, but doth them by his supreme and unspeakable power.  
As then there was not any necessity on the part of God the Father Almighty, to send his only begotten Son into the world, to take our humane nature on him, and suffer an accursed death for the sins of the world: so neither was there any necessity on the part of the word, by which he was enjoined or compelled to take upon him the office of a Mediator, and be incarnate in our flesh. That it was agreeable to the work in hand, that the word should be made flesh, and in that flesh accomplish the whole mystery of our redemption, there are many reasons to persuade. For who was fitter to be cast out into the Sea, to stay the tempest of God's anger against sinful man, than the jonas for whose sake it rose? Almighty God was first displeased for the wrong offered to the word, in that man desired to be like unto God, and to know all things in such sort as is proper to the only begotten Son of the Father. The sin was, caro verbum, then; vile flesh aspired to be made like unto the word: therefore the remedy now must be verbum caro, the word so farforth humbling itself as to be made flesh; Verbum caro factum 
(m) Joh. 1.14.  Who fitter to become the son of man, than he that was by nature the Son of God? Patrem habuit in coelis, Matrem quaesivit in terris, as St. Bernard hath it 
(n) Bern. de Advent. Domini ser. 1. . Who could be fitter to make us the Sons of God by adoption and grace, than the word by which we were to be begotten unto life eternal: or to repair the image of God decayed in us, than he that was the brightness of his Father's glory 
(o) Heb. 1.3. , and the express image of his Person? Finally who more fit to settle the minds of men in a certain and undoubted persuasion of the truth of such things as are necessary to be believed, and thereby bring us into the way of life everlasting; then he that was the way, the truth and the life 
(l) Joh. 14.6. , as himself telleth us of himself in St. john's Gospel? Vt homo fidentius ambularet ad veritatem, ipsa veritas, Dei filius homine assumpto, constituit et fundavit fidem 
(q) Aug. de Civ. 11.2.  as St. Augustine hath it. That man (saith he) might with more confidence travel in the ways of truth; the truth itself, even the Son of God, taking the nature of man upon him, did plant and found that faith which we are to believe. By which it is apparent that it was most agreeable both to our condition, and the nature of the word itself, that he should take upon himself the office of a Mediator between God and Man: but so that he was bound thereto by no necessity, but only out of his mere love and goodness to that wretched Creature. The Scriptures and the Fathers are express in this. Walk in love (saith the Apostle) as Christ hath also loved us, and hath given himself for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God, a sweet smelling savour 
(r) Eph. 5.2.25. . And anon after, Husbands love your wives, even as Christ also loved his Church, and gave himself for it. And in pursuance of this love, he took upon himself the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of man 
(s) Phil. 2.7, 8. , and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the Cross. So that first out of his love and goodness towards us he offered himself to serve and suffer in our places, and after out of the same love submitted himself unto the punishment, which our sins deserved: God not imposing this upon him, by necessity of any inevitable decree, but mercifully accepting his compassionate offer, which did so powerfully conduce unto man's salvation, and the most inexpressible honour of his only Son. The sufferings of CHRIST in regard of man, do take their value from his Person; the excellency of which did prevail so far, as to make the passion of one available for the sins of all. But the merit of those sufferings, in regard of himself, is to be valued by that cheerful freedom with which he pleased to undergo them, and had not been so acceptable nor effectual neither, if they had not been voluntary. For Fathers which affirm the same we need take no thought, having both Reason and the Scriptures so expressly for it: though this be universally the Doctrine of all Catholic wrirers: some of whose words I shall recite, and for the rest refer the Reader to their Books. For the Greek Church thus saith Athanasius, CHRIST seeing the goodness of his Father, and his own sufficiency and power, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, was moved with compassion towards man, and pitying our infirmities, clothed himself with the same 
(t) Athanas. in Passion. & cruc. Dom. ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. and willingly took up his cross, and went uncompelled unto his death. And thus St. Augustine for the Lat●ne. The Word (saith he) was made flesh by his own power, and was born, suffered, died, and rose again 
(u) August. de fide cont. Man. c. 26. , nulla necessitate sed voluntate & potestate, by no necessity laid upon him, but merely of his own good will, and that authority which he had to dispose of himself. See to this purpose the same Augustine in Psal. 8. de Trinit. l. 4. c. 10. Chrysost. in Gen. Hom. 55. & in joh. Hom. 82. Amb. in Psal. 118. Serm. 6. & De Fide, l. 2. c. 1. Hieron. in Isai. cap. 3. & in Psal. 68 Not to descend to those of the later Ages.  
The passages being thus laid open, we now proceed to the great work of the incarnation, wherein the holy Ghost was to have his part, that so none of the Heavenly powers might be wanting to the restauration of collapsed man. That our Redeemers Incarnation in the Virgin's womb was the proper and peculiar work of the holy Ghost, is positively affirmed in St. Matthews Gospel: first in the way of an historical Narration. Before they came together, (as man and wise) she was found with child of the holy Ghost, ch. l. 1. 18. and afterwards by way of declaration from an Angel of Heaven, saying, joseph thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Marry thy wife; for that which is conceived in her, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is of the holy Ghost, vers. 20. Nor wanted there especial reason (if at least any reasons may be given in matters of so high a nature) why this miraculous Conception was committed rather to the holy Ghost, then either acted by the sole power of God the Father, or by the sole virtue of the Word, who was abundantly able to have wrought his own Incarnation. For as the Word was pleased to offer himself to take humane flesh, the better to accomplish the great work of the World's redemption: and as God the Father knowing how unable poor man must be to work out his own salvation otherwise then by such a Saviour, was graciously pleased to accept the offer: so it seemed requisite that God the holy Ghost should prepare that flesh in which the Word of God was to be incarnate. Besides the power of quickening and conferring fruitfulness, is generally ascribed to the Spirit in the Book of God: who therefore in the Nicene (or rather the Constantinopolitan Creed) is called the Lord and giver of life. For thus saith David for the Old Testament, Thou sendest forth thy Spirit, and they are created 
(x) Psal. 104.30. : and thus the son of David for the New Testament; Spiritus est qui vivificat, i. e. It is the Spirit that quickeneth. The holy Ghost than was the proper Agent in the Incarnation. So St. Matthew tells us. But for the manner and the means by which so wonderful a conception was brought to pass, that we find only in St. Luke. The blessed Virgin as it seemed made a question of it, how she should possibly conceive and bring forth a son, considering that as yet she had not had the company of her husband joseph. Quandoquidem virum non cognosco 
(y) Luk. 1.34, 35. , that is to say, since as yet I do not know my husband, (for so I rather choose to read it, then to translate it as it stands in our English Bibles, seeing I know not a man.) For that both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek, and Vir in Latin, do sometimes signify an Husband every Schoolboy knows: and so the words are rendered in our English Bibles, joh. 4.16, 17, 18. and in other places. And this objection she might make, not out of any disbelief of the Angels words; for being then as faulty as old Zachary was, she had been as punishable, since God is no respecter of persons: nor that she had vowed chastity, as the Papists say, and Gregory Nyssen doth report from an unknown Author, whose history he doth confess to be Apocryphal 
(z) Gen. 2.6.  
(z) Greg. Nys. Orati. in Chri. Nat. , (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as his words there are), for then she had done very ill to betrothe herself unto an husband, the vow of Chastity being inconsistent with the state of Matrimony. But this she did, because the Angel seemed to speak of her Conception, as a thing instantly to be done, and then in fieri at the least, as Logicians phrase it: and she, though then betrothed to joseph, was a Virgin still. (for the Text saith it was before they came together); and more than so, there was perhaps some part of the time remaining which usually intervened amongst the jews, betwixt the first Espousals and the consummation of the marriage. But this bar was easily removed. For it followeth, that the Angel answered and said, The holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the most High shall overshadow thee. The holy Ghost shall come upon thee, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as the Greek Text hath it, that is to say, the holy Ghost shall fall upon thee like rain into a fleece of wool, or like the dew of heaven upon a barren and thirsty land where no moisture is: and make thee no less fruitful without help of man, than was the Virgin Earth in its first integrity, when no outward or extrinsical moisture had yet fallen upon it, but that there went up a mist only out of the very bowels thereof, and watered the whole face of the ground 
(a) Gen. 2. 6. . And the power of the most High shall overshadow thee, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the Greek, and cover thee with the wings of his quickening virtue, as the Hen doth Eggs, when she brings forth young.  
To make this matter plainer yet, we shall illustrate it by two Texts of holy Scripture, equal to this both in the wonder and the agent 
(b) Gen. 1.2. . In the beginning (saith the Text) God created the Heaven and the Earth, and the Earth was without form, and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And in the second of the same Book we read that God created man out of the dust of the earth, vers. 7. In each of these there is a subject some matter, such as it was, to be wrought upon: that confused mixture of Earth and waters to be disposed into a world; the dust and Atoms of that world to be contrived into a man. The fashioning and accomplishment of which great works, both of them seeming as impossible to sense and reason, as the Conception of our Saviour in a Virgin's Womb, is in the Scripture attributed to the holy Ghost. The Spirit of God (saith Moses) moved upon the face of the waters 
(c) Gen. 1.2. . Hence the digestion of that matter, fashioned into that goodly fabric of Heaven and Earth which we so visibly behold with such admiration. God breathed into his nostrils the breath (or spirit) of life (inspiravit in faciem ejus spiraculum vitae 
(d) Gen. 2.7. , from whence the Animation and soul of man. This action then ascribed unto the holy Ghost, which St. Luke calleth a supervenience or a coming upon, and an obumbration or over-shadowing, is likely to have been much of the same nature, with that of moving in the first, and that of breathing in the 2. of Genesis. God's Spirit as it breatheth where it listeth, so can it quicken where it pleaseth. Some there have been, if Maldonate do report them rightly, Qui turpe aliquid hoc loco somniant 
(e) Maldon. in Luc. 1.35. , who have made some impure construction of this holy Text; most impudently affirming, Spiritum sanctum ad modum viri cum Maria concubuisse 
(f) Id. in Mat. c. 1. v. 18. , I abhor to English it: but who they were, he either was afraid or ashamed to tell us. No doubt but they were some of the Romish party. For had such a blasphemous and ungodly saying dropped from the mouth or pen of a Protestant, all Christendom had been told of his name and Nation. And therefore certainly this quidam whom he spares to name, must be some such good fellow of the Catholic faction, as Friar Albert of the frock, as they use to call him. Of whom I remember I have read in some of their Authors, that being a great Votary of the blessed Virgins, she appeared nightly to him in her bodily shape, espoused herself to him by a ring, and suffered himself to converse with her in familiar manner. Insomuch as he might say in the Poet's language. 

Contrectatque sinus, & forsitan oseula jungit,   

He dallied with her Paps  
And kissed her too perhaps.   But I do ill to mingle these impurities with this sacred argument, if the unmasking of the obscoenities of those great Professors of vowed chastity do not plead my pardon. And yet I cannot choose but add, that these lazy lives of some of the Monks and Friars, have carried them so far into spiritual fornications, or rather into contemplative lusts; that many of them have fancied to themselves such unclean commixtures, (as that of Friar Albert) with the blessed Virgin. To what end else served those large Faculties which were given unto Tekelius a Dominican Friar, when he was sent to publish the pardons or Indulgences of Pope Leo the tenth, in the upper Germany? Who spared not to affirm even in common Alehouses, that by his Bulls he had authority to absolve any man whatsoever, Etiamsi Virginem matrem vitiaverit, though he had vitiated or deflowered the Virgin Mother 
(g) Sleidam Comment. , as Sleidan tells the story in his book of Commentaries. I know that in the later Editions of this Author, (as in that of Colen, printed An. ....) the words are changed to Virginem aut matrein, a maid, or a mother; and so to mend the matter they have marred the sense. For what need such large faculties as Tekelius bragged of, for pardoning fornication or Adultery, for the deflowering of a Virgin, or lying with another man's wife, which every ordinary Priest can absolve of course. Besides in the first Edition of that Author, printed at ..... An. .... it is plainly Virginem Matrem, the Virgin Mother. And so 'tis in an old English Translation of him printed at London, and la Veirge Mere, as plainly in a French Translation, printed at Geneva, An. 1574. Marvel it is, that Maldonate hath not undergone the like castigation, whose Quidam whatsoever he was, offended more against the Majesty of the holy Ghost, than Tekel did (save that the Pope's authority was concerned in it) against the modesty and piety of the Virgin Mary.  
To return therefore where I left, as I abominate the impieties of these Romish Votaries, so neither can I approve the conceit of Estius, (though otherwise a very learned and sound Expositor of holy Scripture, where the interest of the Church of Rome is not concerned) who by the power of the most High, understands here the very person of God the Son, and by this over-shadowing of the blessed Virgin, his voluntary Incarnation in her sanctified womb. His words are these, 
(h) Estius in Luc. c. 1. v. 35.  Per virtutem Altissimi intelligi ipsum Dei Filium (qui est virtus & brachium, & potentia Patris) quique obumbraturus significatur Virginem, illapsu suo in uterum Virginis per occultum Incarnationis mysterium. But by his leave I cannot herein yield unto his opinion; though Chrysostom and Gregory for the ancient Writers, Beda and Damascene for the Authors of the middle times, do seem to contenance it. For not St. Augustine only, as himself confesseth, and Euthymius a good writer also are against him in it, but the plain text and context of the holy Scripture: which makes the quickening of the womb of this blessed Virgin to be the work only of one Agent, though it be expressed by different titles. Nor are such repetitions strange or extraordinary in the Book of God, nor can it give any colour to distinguish the power of the most High from the holy Ghost; as if they were two different Agents: unless we can distinguish the Lord our God from him that dweleth in the Heavens, because we find them both together in the 2. Psalms, He that dwelleth in the Heavens shall laugh them to scorn, the Lord shall have them in derision 
(i) Psal. 2 4. . And though it cannot be denied, but that the Son of God is the very power and strength of his Father: yet himself doth give this very name of power to the holy Ghost. For when he commanded the Apostles to abide in the City of Jerusalem, donec induantur virtute ex alto, i. e. until they were ●ndued with power from on high 
(k) Luk. 24.29. , what else did he intend thereby, but that they should continue there until they were endued with the holy Ghost? Of which see Act. 2.4. Besides if this opinion should be once admitted, we must exclude the holy Gh●st from having any thing to do in so great a mystery: and so not only bring the Creed under an Expurgatorius Index but the Scripture too. Letting this therefore stand for a truth undeniable, that the over-shadowing (as the Text calleth it) of the blessed Virgin, was the proper and peculiar work of the holy Ghost: let us next see whether the nature of the miracle be not agreeable to the operations of the holy Spirit; or such as may not be admitted for a truth undoubted, by equal and indifferent men, though they be not Christians, nor take it up upon the credit of the Word of God. And first that of itself it is agreeable to the operations of the Spirit, the course of his Divine power in the works of nature doth expressly manifest. For as in the spiritual regeneration, though it be Paul that planteth, and Apollo that watereth; yet it is God who gives the increase 
(l) 1 Cor. 3.6. ; without whose blessing on their labours, their labours will prove fruitless and ineffectual: so also in the act of carnal generation, though the man and woman do their parts for the pro creation of children, yet if the quickening Spirit of God do not bless them in it, and stir up the emplastic virtue of the natural seed, they may go childless to their graves. It is the Spirit which quickeneth what the womb doth breed. And therefore in my mind Lactantius noted very well, Hominem non Patrem esse sed generandi Ministrum 
(m) Lactant. l. 5. c. 19 , that man was nothing but the instrument which the Lord did use for the effecting of his purpose, to raise that goodly edifice of flesh and blood, which he contemplates in his children. It is the Spirit of God, as the Scripture tells us which first gave form unto the world; from whence that known passage of the Poet, Spiritus intus alit, had its first Original, of which we have made use in our former book. And if the chief work, or rather the principal part in the work of nature in the ordinary course of Generation, and first production of the Word, may be ascribed, as most undoubtedly it must, unto the powerful influence of this quickening Spirit: with how much more assurance may he be entitled to the Incarnation of the Word, to which one sex only did contribute, and that the weakest, without the mutual help and co-operation of the seed of man.  
Nor is the greatness of the Miracle so beyond belief, but that there is sufficient in the holy Scripture to convince the jew; and in the writings of the Poets to persuade the Gentiles, to the admission of this truth: and consequently to confirm all good Christians in it. Out of the Virgin-Earth did God first make Adam; and out of Virgin Adam he created Eve: Adam first made without the help of man or woman; and Eve made after out of Adam, who had no wife but this which was made out of him. Why might not then the blessed Virgin be as capable of conceiving a Son by the sole power and influence of the holy Ghost, without help of man; as Adam was, of being Father unto Eve, by the self same power, without the use of a woman? Without a Mother, Eve; without Father CHRIST; Adam without both Father and Mother: but all the handiwork of God by the holy Spirit. Equivalent in effect to the creation of Adam, and the production of Eve was the birth of Isaac, conceived by Sarah when it had ceased to be with her after the manner of women 
(n) Gen 18.11. ; by consequence as indisposed to the act of conception, as if she had been still a Virgin, or which is more than that, under years of marriage. The strength that Sarah had to bring forth that Son was not natural to her, for she was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, past the age of child-bearing, as the Text informs us: but a strength supernatural given from God on high, and therefore called a received strength, (she received strength to conceive seed, Heb. 11.11.) because not naturally her own, but received extraordinarily from God. As Isaac was in many things a Type of CHRIST; so in no one thing more exactly, then that he was the only Son, or the dearly beloved Son of his Father, begotten on a woman past the time of her age, whose dead womb could not but by such a miracle be revived again. To this the jews most cheerfully do give assent, boasting themselves to be the children of Abraham by this very venture. What reason have they then not to yield to this, but that they resolved not to yield to reason? Next for the Gentiles, do we not find it in their Poets, that Venus was engendered of the froth of the Sea, animated by the warmth and influence of the Sun; that Pallas issued from Ioves brain, and Bacchus from the thigh of jupiter? Do we not read that most of their Heroes so much famed of old, were begotten by their Gods upon mortal creatures, as Hercules on Alcmene by jupiter; Phaeton on Clymene by Phoebus; and Pa● on Penelope by Mercury? And is it not recorded in their most authentic Histories, that Romulus the first King and founder of Rome was begotten by Mars upon the body of Rhea a Vestal Virgin? Romulus a Marte genttus & Rhea Silvia 
(o) Flor. hist. Ro. l. 1. c. 1. , as Florus summarily reports it. Had not the Lusitanians a race of Horses which they believed to be engendered by the wind; the fancy growing from the knowledge of their excellent swiftness? At this Lactantius toucheth in his Book of Institutes, and makes it a convincing Argument in this case against the Gentiles; who might as easily believe the miracle of the incarnation, as give faith to that, Quod si animalia quaedam vento & aura concipere solere, omnibus notum est, cur quisquam mirum putet cum Spiritu Dei, cui est facile quicquid velit, gravatam Virginem esse dicimus 
(p) Lactans. l. 4. cap. 12. ? No question but the Spirit of God might be conceived as operative as the wind or air.  
But leaving these Romances of the ancient Heathens, though arguments good enough ad homines (and beyond that they are not meant) let us next look a while on the blessed Virgin, who questionless did somewhat to advance the work, and left it not wholly to the managing of the holy Ghost. But what she did was rather from the strength of faith then nature. For had she not believed, she had never conceived. And thereupon it is resolved by St. Augustine rightly, Feliciorem Mariam esse percipiendo fidem Christi, quam concipiendo carnem Christi 
(q) August. de Virginit. , that she was happier by believing than she was by conceiving; though in that too pronounced the most blessed amongst women. Now in the strengthening of this faith many things concurred; as the authority of the Messenger, who coming from the God of truth, could not tell a lie; the general expectation which the jews had about this time of the Messiahs near approach; the argument used by the Angel touching God's Omnipotence, with whom nothing was said to be impossible: 
(r) Luk. 1.37.  and so not this; the instance of a like miracle wrought upon Elizabeth the wife of Zachary almost as old, but altogether in the same case with Sarah, who had conceived a son in her old age 
(s) Ibid. v. 36. , beyond the ordinary course of nature. And to say truth, these arguments were but necessary to beget belief to so great a miracle, to which no former age could afford a parallel, though that of Sarah came most nigh it. And if that Sarah thought it such a matter of impossibility, then to conceive and bear a son when it only ceased to be with her after the manner of women, as the Text tells us that she did: how much more justly might the Virgin think it an impossible thing, for her to be conceived with child, and bring forth a Son, and yet continue still a Virgin? But at the last the strength of faith overcame all difficulties; and by the cheerfulness of her obedience she made a way for this great blessing, which was coming towards her. Behold the handmaid of the Lord, Be it to me according unto thy word 
(t) Ibid. v. 38. . Which whether they were words of wishing that so it might be, as St. Ambrose, Venerable Beda, and Euthymius think; or of consent, that so it should be, as Ireneus and Damascen are of opinion: certain it is, that on the speaking of those words she did conceive Celestial seed, and in due time brought forth her Saviour. As is affirmed by Irenaeus, l. 1. c. 33. Tertullian in his book De Carne Christi; Athanasius in his Oration De Sancta Deipara, and divers others. A work, as of great efficacy unto our Salvation, so of especial esteem in the Christian Church; the day whereof, called usually the Feast of the Annunciation, hath anciently been observed as an holy Festival, as appears by several Homilies made upon this subject, by Gregory surnamed Thaumaturgus who lived in the year 230. and that of Athanasius in the time of Constantine. A day of such high esteem amongst us in England, that we begin our year from thence, both in the vulgar estimate and all public Instruments; though in our Calendars we begin with the first of january, according to the custom of the ancient Romans.  
But here it may be asked, why CHRIST should not be called the Son of the holy Ghost, according to his humane nature, considering that not St. Luke only ascribeth unto him the work of the Incarnation, under the title of an overshadowing; but that it is affirmed by St. Matthew in terms more express, that she (the blessed Virgin Mother) was found to be with child of the holy Ghost 
(u) Mat. 1.18. . And he, by whom a woman is conceived with child, is properly and naturally, though not always legally, (for Pater est quem nuptiae demonstrant, as the Lawyers tell us) the right Father of it. A consideration which prevailed so far with some of St. Hieromes time, that they began to stumble upon this opinion: but with no better reason in true Divinity, than Christ may be affirmed to be the Father Almighty intended in the former Articles; because creation is the work of the Father Almighty, and it is written by St. john, that by him (that is to say the Son) all things were made 
(x) Joh. 1.3. . For all things were so made by the Word, as the Word was made flesh, or incarnate by the holy Ghost: God, (I mean God the first Person here, as generally the Scripture doth where it speaks of God without limitation or restrictions) acting by them those two great works which in the holy Text are to them ascribed; yet by them not as Ministers subservient to him, but coworking with him. God (saith St. Paul) hath in these last days spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the Worlds 
(y) Heb. 1.2. . God made the world, though he made it by his Son, to the end, that all things being created by him, might be also for him 
(z) Col. 1.17. . And so 'tis also in the work of the incarnation; God by his Spirit fructifying the Virgin's womb, and sanctifying the materials with which the Word (which in the beginning was with God) was to be invested; to the intent that the Spirit might bear witness to us 
(a) 1 Joh. 5.6. & Joh. 1.33. , that he was the beloved Son of God in whom his Father was well pleased. And yet there is another reason why he should rather be called the Son of God, then of the holy Ghost; because he had a pre-existence, before he was incarnate in the Virgin's womb, as he was the Word, the Word which in the beginning was not only with God, but was also God; by an unspeakable way of emanation from the Father only, as the Word is first conceived in the mind of man, before it be uttered by the voice. For as the Son is to the Father, so is the Word to the Mind. The Son proles parentis, the Word proles mentis, saith the learned Andrews 
(b) B. Andrews Serm. 6. on the Nativity. . God therefore being an eternal, everlasting Mind, did before all beginnings of time produce the Word, by which in the beginning of time all things were created; By consequence when the Word was pleased to be incarnate, or to be made flesh in St. john's own language: the person thus made Christ of the Word and flesh, though he was incorporated into this flesh by the powerful influence and operation of the holy Ghost, was properly to be called the Son of God, in whom and of whom only he before existed: the holy Ghost not being the Author of any new Person, but only betroathing to the Word the humane nature of CHRIST, which had no actual existence before those Espousals. I know I cannot speak too reverently of so great a mystery, or think too worthily of that wonderful and miraculous Act of the Incarnation or Conception of our blessed Saviour. And yet I doubt that some by thinking that he was not form and fashioned in his Mother's womb, by those gradations to perfection, which are necessary to all natural births, but make his body to be perfected all at once in the very moment of his Conception, and at that instant the reasonable soul to be actually infused into it: do unawares deprive him of a great deal of honour, which his humiliation to our nature did confer upon him. Of this mind is Maldonate for one, whose words take here together for our more assurance; 
(c) Maldon. in Luc. c. 1. v. 38.  Alios paulatim sensimque in utero formari, antequam Corpuscul●m animetur: Christi vero corpus eodem momento quo conceptum est formari, & animatum fuisse. Which were it so, our Saviour CHRIST had not in all things been made like unto us, contrary to the express words of holy Scripture; nor needed to have lain so long time in his Mother's womb, his body being completely form and animated in the first conception. But I believe the jesuit had a further aim in it, than he pleased to discover. And possibly it might be an ingenuous fear of arrogating or ascribing more to a common Priest, than had been granted to be done by the holy Ghost. For needs it must seem harsh to most Popish ears, that the Body of CHRIST should be nine months in forming in his mother's womb, though supernaturally conceived by the Divine power and influence of the holy Ghost: and yet upon the Priests saying, Hoc est Corpus meum, the self same body and soul, with his Divinity▪ and all into the bargain, should instantly be made of a piece of bread, without expecting nine minutes for so great a miracle. Most happy men, who come so ne'er the power and Majesty of Almighty God, and the prerogatives of CHRIST: that as the one could have raised children out of stones to Abraham; and the other command stones to be made bread; so they can out of bread raise a Son to God, and not a son to God only, but even God the Son: which is more than was (I dare not say, or could be) done by the holy Ghost, whose part in this great work we have spoke of hitherto.    

ARTICULI 4. Pars 2da. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. i e. Natus ex Virgin Maria. i e. Born of the Virgin Mary.  

CHAP. IU. Of the birth of CHRIST. The feast of his Nativity. Why born of a Virgin. The Prophecy of Isaiah. The Parentage and privilege of the Blessed Virgin.  
PRoceed we to the second branch of this present Article, from the Conception to the Birth of our Lord and Saviour; the most material part to us of the whole mystery. It had been little to our comfort, though much unto the honour of our humane nature, had the WORD been only made flesh, and with that flesh ascended presently into heaven, and had not dwelled amongst us, and shown forth his glory, as the glory of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth 
(a) Joh. 1.14. . It was not Gods being in the flesh, but his being manifested in the flesh; which St. Paul calls, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the great mystery of Godliness 
(b) 1 Tim. 3.17. . For without that, although he might have been seen of Angels, yet had he not been preached unto the Gentiles, nor been believed on in the world, as the Saviour of it. The end of his taking on himself our flesh, was to save poor man. For this is an acceptable saying, (as St. Paul hath told us) that JESUS CHRIST came into the world to save sinners 
(c) 1 Tim. 1.15. ; and come into the world he could not (in the sense he speaks of) but by being born. I know some think, that though ADAM had never sinned, yet it had been necessary for the exaltation of humane nature, that the WORD should have been made man: and Bonaventure 
(d) Bonavent. in 3 Sent. didst 4. qu. 2.  doth approve it as a Catholic opinion, and consonant to natural reason. But howsoever it may seem in his judgement to agree with reason, assuredly it is more agreeable to the piety and analogy of faith, that the Son of God had never appeared in our flesh but for the delivery of mankind from sin and misery: neither the Scripture nor the Father's speaking of the incarnation but with reference to man's redemption. To this effect St. Augustine speaketh most divinely, Si homo non periisset, filius hominis non venisset; nulla causa fuit Christi veniendi, nisi peccatores salvos facere. Tolle morbos, tolle vulnera, et nulla est medicinae causa 
(e) Aug. de. verb. Apostol. Serm. 70. . That is to say, If man had not perished, the son of man had not come (for therefore came the son of man to save that which was lost 
(f) Luk. 19.10. .): there being no other cause of Christ's coming but the salvation of sinners. Take away diseases and wounds from man, and what need is there of a Physician? So that resolving with the Scriptures and Fathers, that there was no cause for the incarnation of the WORD, but that he should be born for our redemption; let us proceed therein with that fear and reverence which justly doth belong to so great a mystery, as the manifestation of God in the flesh is said to be by the Apostle. A mystery in which there is not any thing beneath a miracle. Nor can it easily be resolved whether of the two be more full of wonder, either that God the WORD should be born of Woman, or born of such a woman as was a Virgin. The first and greatest of the two, that which indeed is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a miracle of miracles, as man is somewhere called by Plato, was that the word was made flesh, and did receive that flesh from a mortal womb. A wonder it seemed to Nicodemus that a man should be born when he was old 
(g) Joh. 3.4. , or enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born again. A greater wonder must it be for him to enter into the womb, and thence to find a passage into the world, who was far older than all time, and had his being when the world but began to be. A greater wonder must it seem for him to take a being from a mortal creature, by whom all creatures had their being, and did himself create the same womb which bore him. But such was his unspeakable love to the sons of men, that he disdained not to submit himself for their sakes to those low conditions, as to be made man and to have a Mother; a Mother which beyond example did bring forth her God, and became the Parent of her Saviour, Et mater sine exemplo genuit autorem suum 
(h) Lact. l. 2. c. 9 , as Lactantius hath it.  
Born then our Saviour was of a mortal womb. But the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used in the present Article tells us more than so, and telleth us that he was not only born of the Virgin Mary, but so born of her as to be made of her also. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, And the word was made flesh, joh. 1.14. God sent his Son, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, made of a woman, saith St. Paul, Gal. 4.4. where the same word is used as here. Made then he was, as well as born of the Virgin Mary. And made, not convertendo, not by converting the Word into flesh, as Cerinthus; nor converting flesh into the WORD, as Velentinus was of opinion: for the deity cannot be changed into any thing, nor any thing into it. Nor was it made conciliando, as friends are made one, or reconciled, so as they continue two persons still; and while the flesh suffered, the WORD stood still and looked on only, as Nestorius taught; for that were not to be made flesh, but made with the flesh, not caro, sed cum carne, saith my reverend Author 
(i) B. Andrw. Serm. 6. on the Nativ. . Nor finally was he made componendo, by compounding two persons together, and so a third thing produced of both, as Eutyches: for so he should be neither of both, neither the word nor flesh, neither God nor man. But made he was, as St. Paul tells us, assumendo, by taking the seed of Abraham, Heb. 2.16. His generation before time, as verbum Deus, is as the enditing the word within the heart. His generation in time, as verbum caro, is as the uttering it forth with the voice. The inward motion of the mind taketh unto it a natural body of Air, and so becometh vocal. It is not changed into it, the word remaineth still as it was; yet they two became one voice. Take a similitude from ourselves. Our soul is not turned into, nor compounded with the body; yet they two though distinct in natures, grow into one man. So Athanasius in his Creed. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and man is one Christ So into the Godhead was the manhood taken, the natures preserved without confusion; the person entire without division. The fourth General Council so determineth also, Sic factum est caro ut maneret verbum, non immutando quod erat, sed suscipiendo quoth not erat. Nostra auxit, sua non minuit, nec Sacramentum pietatis, detrimentum est Deitatis, i. e. He was so made flesh that he ceased not to be the Word, never changing what he was, but taking that he was not. We were the better, he was never the worse. The mystery of Godliness was was no detriment to the Godhead, nor the honour of the creature wrong to the Creator. No wrong indeed it was, no detriment to the divine nature of the Word to be made flesh, and take upon him the infirmities of our humane nature; but much to the advancement of our humane nature, which he took upon him: as many Kings and sovereign Princes have been made free of some particular Corporations under their commands, without diminution or impeachment of their Royal Power, and highly to the honour of those Companies or Corporations. Mortalis factus est non infirmata verbi divinitate, sed carnis suscepta infirmitate, as divinely Angustine in his De Civit. dei. l. 9 c. 15. And herein miserable man hath a great advantage of the Angels, though made lower than they in his creation, in that the WORD God for ever blessed, vouchsafed to be made in such manner of our rank and order, as he is not of theirs.  
From the manner pass we to the time when this work was wrought, which St. Paul calls plenitudinem temporis 
(k) Gal. 4.4. , or the fullness of time, that is to say, when the time was come and fully accomplished, which God in his eternal wisdom had fore-determined; which he had also signified to the house of Israel by the mouth of his Prophets. In reference to the civil Account, it was at the time when Herod a stranger to the bloud-royal of David, was King of jewry; and Augustus Caesar the sole Monarch of the Roman Empire. The first having translated the Sceptre from Judah, and the Lawgiver from between his feet, made an apparent way for the coming of Shiloh 
(l) Gen. 49.10. , to whom the gathering of the people was now to be. The latter having the third time closed the Temple of janus, and settled an universal peace over all the Empire, made it the most agreeable time for the birth of him, who being called the Prince of peace by the Prophet Isaiah, proclaimed peace unto all the earth at the hour of his birth, and left it to his Disciples as his last Legacy at the time of his death. And it was also in the time of a general taxing, as our English, or rather of a general enrolment (cum universus orbis describeretur saith the vulgar very answerably to the Greek Originals) as the Rhemists read it. A time when every subject of the Roman Empire was to repair to the head City of his family, there to list his name; and to profess (ut profiterentur, saith the Vulgar) or make acknowledgement of his fealty and true allegiance to the Prince in being. A thing not done at random, or by humane providence, that by this means the Emperor might come to know, quot civium sociorumque in Armis 
(m) Tacit. Annal. lib. 1. , the strength and number of his Subjects, as the Statists tell us; but by the special dispensation and appointment of Almighty God. Though Christ had been conceived in Nazareth, a City of Galilee; yet was he to be born in Bethlehem the City of David. And thither was joseph to repair, to be taxed (or enroled rather) with Mary his wife 
(n) Luk. 2.4, 5. , that she being there delivered of her blessed burden, the word of God foresignifyed by the Prophet Micah, might be fulfilled: viz. that out of Bethlehem-Judah there should come a Governor 
(o) Micah 5.2 Mar. 2.5. , which should rule over the house of Israel. The shutting of the Temple of janus, and this general taxing or enrolment under the President-ship of Cyrenius point us directly to the 35. year of Augustus his Empire, in which CHRIST was born. And if it were esteemed (as it seems to be) so great an honour unto Cicero, that this Augustus was born when he was Consul; (Consulatui Ciceronis non mediocre adjecit decus, natus eo anno D. Augustus 
(p) Vel. Paterc. hist. l. 2. , saith the Court Historian): how great an honour may we count it unto this Augustus, that CHRIST the Son of God, the very brightness of his Father, was born when he was Emperor? And as the year, so is the very month and day of our Saviour's birth transmitted to us from the best and purest times of the Christian Church; though not recorded in the Scriptures. Theophilus Caesariensis, who lived about the latter end of the second Century, doth place it on the eight of the Calends of january (which is the 25. of December) as we now observe it: and reckoneth it as a festival of the Christian Church long before his time. Natalem Domini quocunque die VIII. Calend. Januar. venerit, celebrare debemus, as his own words are. And Nyssen though he name not the day precisely, yet calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the famous day of Christian solemnity 
(o) Greg. Nyss. hom. de Christ. Nativ. ; and placeth it in that point of time, (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as he telleth us there) in which the days wax longer, and the nights grow shorter: which is (we know) about the time of the Winter Solstice. In an old Arabic copy of Apostolic Canons, it is especially appointed that the Anniversary feast of the Lords Nativity be kept upon the 25. day of the first Canun (which is the same with our December) on which day he was born. A Persian Calendar or Ephemeris doth place it on the same day also. The Syriack Churches do the like, and so do the Egyptian or Coptick Churches, as Mr. Gregory hath observed out of their Records: not to say any thing of johannes Antiochenus, the Author of an old MS. Cosmography, who doth affirm as much for the East parts of the Roman Empire. A day so highly esteemed in the former times, that the Greeks called it generally 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or the feast of God's manifestation in the flesh; Chrysostom, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(p) Chrysost. in Orat. de Philog. , the Mother or Metropolis of all other festivals: another of the Eastern Fathers, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the festival of the world's salvation. A day of such a solemn concourse in the Christian Church, that the Tyrants in the 10. Persecution made choice thereof as an especial opportunity for committing the greater slaughter of poor innocent souls: and therefore on that day (in ipso natalis Dominici die 
(q) Neceph. Eccl. hist. l. 7. c. 6. , as my Author hath it) burned down the Church of Nicomedia, the then Regal City of the East, with all that were assembled in it for God's public service. I know great pains have been unprofitably took to no other purpose, but to prove that Christ was born at some other time of the year, at least not on the day which is now pretended. But the Arguments on which the disproof is founded are so slight and trivial, that it were loss of labour to insist upon them. Suffice it, that the Church had far better reason to celebrate the birthday of the Son of God, than any of the sons of men to suppress the same.  
And this I call the birthday of the Son of God, because from this day forwards he was so indeed, though not publicly proclaimed or avowed for such, till the day of his Baptism 
(r) Mat. 3.17 Luk. 3.22. , when it was solemnly made known by a voice from heaven. The Word before, In the beginning was the Word, joh. 1.1. The Word made flesh, and born of the Virgin Mary, and by that birth, the only begotten Son of God full of grace and truth, said the same Evangelist, v. 14. For though we did not look upon him as the word made flesh, his being born in such a miraculous manner of an untouched Virgin, would of itself assert him for the Son of God. So said the Angel Gabriel, the first Evangelist 
(s) Luc. 1.35. , Therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. The Son of God, as soon as born of the Virgin Mary: because conceived and born in so strange a manner, so far above the course of nature, that none but God, the God of nature could lay claim unto him. For here the great miracle of the incarnation doth receive improvement, in that the WORD was not only made flesh, and born of a woman; but born of such a woman as was a Virgin. That so it was we have the warrant of the Scripture. In the sixth month the Angel Gabriel was sent from God to a City of Galilee named Nazareth 
(t) Id. v. 26, 27. , to a Virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the Virgin's name was MARY. So far the Text informs us in the present business, giving her in one verse twice the name of Virgin, the better to imprint the same in our hearts and memories. And certainly it stood with reason that it should be so. For although Miracles in themselves are above our reason, because beyond the reach of all natural causes: yet doth it stand with very good reason, that since the WORD vouchsafed to descend so low▪ as to be born of a woman, he should receive that birth from the purest Virgin, and be fashioned in a womb which was unpolluted. The pious care of his Disciples did conceive it fitting that his dead body should be laid in a Tomb or Sepulchre, where never man was laid before 
(u) Joh. 19 41. . And was it not as fit, or fitter, that his living body great with Divinity and a soul (for in him dwelled the fullness of the Godhead bodily 
(x) Col. 2.9. ) should be conceived in such a womb which had not been defiled with the seed of man, in whose most chaste embraces and unblamable dalliances, there is a mixture of Concupiscence and carnal lusts. Most fit it was his Mother should be like his Spouse; 
(y) Cant. 4.12.  of whom we find it written in the Song of Solomon, that she is as a Garden enclosed, a spring shut up, a fountain ●ealed. Besides, the means and method of man's redemption was to hold some proportion with the means of his fall: that so that Sex might have the honour of our restauration, which had been the unhappy Author of our first calamity; that as by woman the Devil took his opportunity to introduce death into the world (for the woman being deceived was in the transgression, saith St. Paul to Timothy 
(z) 1 Tim. 2.14. ); so by a woman, and a Virgin (such as Eve was then) did Gods foreknowing will determine that life, even life eternal should be born into it. Eve the first woman out of an ambitious desire to be like to God, coveted after the forbidden tree of good and evil. The second Eve, if I may so call her (as Christ is called the second Adam, 1 Cor. 15.45.) out of an obedient desire that God might be as one of us, did gladly bear in her womb the tree of life, of which whosoever eateth he shall live for ever 
(a) Joh. 6.51. . Eve, as her name importeth, was the Mother of all living, of all that live this temporal and mortal life, the life of nature: and MARY in due time became the mother of that living Spirit, by whom we are begotten to the life of grace. So true is that of Gregory surnamed Thaumaturgus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(b) Greg. Thaum. Serm. de Annunc. Virg. , that from the same Sex came our weal and wo. To drive this Parallel further yet. Eve at the time of the transgression was an untouched Virgin, a Virgin though betrothed to her husband Adam, (for she was a Virgin espoused from her first creation) when she conceived sin and brought forth iniquity: and Mary was an espoused Virgin (espoused to a man whose name was joseph) when she conceived the Son of righteousness, and brought forth salvation. And as the first woman conceived death by believing an evil Angel, without consulting with her husband till the deed was done: so the espoused Virgin of the present Article, conceived in her body the Lord of life, by believing the words and message of a good Angel, her husband being not made privy to it, till he perceived she was with child. Some reasons then there were why it should be so, why Christ our Saviour should be born of the purest Virgin, though those reasons do not make it to be less a miracle; for nothing but a miracle and the holy Ghost, could have begotten such a child upon such a Mother.  
That by this means the miserable fall of man was to be repaired, it pleased God to declare unto our wretched Parents before they were exiled from the garden of Eden. It was the first and greatest comfort which was given unto them, that the seed of the woman should break the head of the serpent 
(c) Gen. 3.15. , and that the serpent should but bruise the heel of the woman's seed; that is to say, that there should one be born of the woman's seed, who by the sufferings of his body, his inferior part, should overcome the powers of Hell, and set man free from that captivity in which he was held bound by Satan. And as it was the first in the general promise, so was it (as I think) the clearest and most evident light to point us out to the particular of bringing this great work to pass by a Virgin-birth. Though Adam was the root of mankind, and lost himself and his posterity by his disobedience, yet was the promise made to Eve a Virgin; and not to Adam's seed at all, nor any to be procreated from the seed of man. It is a common resolution of the Schoolmen, that if Eve only had transgressed, Adamo in innocentia permanente, Adam continuing still in his first integrity, neither the souls of their posterity had been tainted with original sin, nor their body made subject unto death 
(d) Aquin. 1.2 qu. 11. Art. 5. . It was in Adam that all die, as St▪ Paul hath told us 
(e) 1 Cor. ●5. 22. . It is in Adam that all die, but 'twas in Eve, that all should be made alive: not in Eves person but her seed. The promise made to Eve a Virgin, that her seed should break the serpent's head▪ foresignifyed, that our redeemer should be born of a Virgin Mother: such as Eve was, when this first publication of God's will was made. A clearer evidence than which as to this particular, I think is hardly to be found in the book of God: that so much celebrated place of the Prophet Isaiah, Behold, a Virgin shall conceive, not being primarily intended of the birth of CHRIST, though in his birth accomplished in a more excellent manner, than first intended by the Prophet. The estate of Ahaz King of judah at that time, stood this; A storm was threatened to his Kingdom from the joint forces of Rezin King of Syria, and Pekah King of Samaria: which so dismayed the hearts of Ahaz and of all his people, that they were as the trees of the wood moved with the wind 
(f) Isa. 7.2. , as the text informs us, not knowing upon what to fasten, nor for what to hope. In this great consternation comes Isaiah to them with a message from God, assuring them of the speedy destruction of those Kings whom they so much feared. But this when Ahaz durst not credit, nor would be moved to ask a sign from God to confirm his faith, and to assure himself of a quick deliverance: it pleased God to give him this by the mouth of the Prophet, Behold a Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call his name Immanuel. Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good. For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the Land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her Kings 
(g) Id. v. 14, 15, 16. . To say that this was literally and originally meant of the birth of CHRIST, is not consistent with the case and circumstances of the present business. The King and people were in danger of a present war, and nothing but the hope of a present deliverance was able to revive their despairing hearts. And what sign could it be to confirm that hope, that after 700. years and upwards (for so long time there was between the death of Ahaz and the birth of Christ) a Virgin should conceive and bring forth a Son. Cold comfort could there be in this to that generation, who could not hope for so long life as to see the wonder. So that the literal meaning of the Prophecy is most like to be, that before some noted Virgin then of fame and credit, or else within that space of time that any who was then a Virgin should conceive a child according to the ordinary course of nature; and that that child should be of age to know good from evil, the two Kings spoken of before should be both destroyed. That so it is, seemeth very evident to me by the success of the business. For in the next Chapter we find that Isaiah went unto the Prophetess, (perhaps the Virgin spoken of in the former passages) and she conceived and bore a Son, whom the Lord commanded to be called Mahershalalhashbaz 
(h) Isa. 8.3, 4. ; and gives this reason for the name, being so unusual, that before the child shall have the knowledge to cry my Father, and my Mother (which is the same with that of refusing the evil and choosing the good) the riches of Damascus and the spoil of Samaria shall be taken away before the King of Assyria. And so it proved in the event. For before this Mahershalalhashbaz so conceived and born, was able to distinguish of meats, or know his Father and Mother from other people; was the word fulfilled which God had spoken by the Prophet touching their deliverance: Pekah being slain by Hoseah the son of Elah, and Rezin by Tiglath-Pilesar the King of Assyria, within two or three years after the said sign was given. Of which see a King. 16.5, 6, 7, etc. & Chron. 17.1. But then we must observe withal, that this Prophecy being thus fulfilled in the literal sense, according to the Prophet's intent and purpose, contained in it a more mystical meaning according to the secret purpose of Almighty God: this temporal deliverance of Ahaz and the house of judah from the hands of two such potent enemies, being a type or figure of that spiritual and eternal deliverance which he intended unto them and to all mankind from the tyranny of sin and Satan. Which secret will and purpose of Almighty God, being made known to the Evangelist by the holy Ghost, he might and did apply it to the birth of Christ 
(i) Mat. 1.22, 23. , born of a most immaculate Virgin, as a more punctual fulfilling of that sacred Prophecy, than what before had happened in the days of Ahaz.  
But MARY as she was a Virgin, a Virgin and the heir of the promise which was made to Eve, and made to Eve when she was yet a Virgin, though espoused to Adam: so was she also a daughter, if not an heir to all those blessings, which God had promised unto David; the heir as some suppose of the Royal Family, and thereby gave our Saviour an unquestioned title to the Realm of jewry. But this I take to be a supposition so ill grounded (though I see great pains taken in defence thereof) that I dare not lay any part of my building on it. 'Tis true, the jews, who knew of his descent from David, and greedily laid hold upon all occasions for the recovery of their lost liberties, sought after him to make him King 
(k) Joh. 6 15. . But this they did not on an opinion that he was the next heir unto the Crown, but because they thought him best able to make good the Title. For having seen him feed so many thousands of men with no more provision, then only a few Barley loaves and two small fishes: they presently conceived that he was able to raise victuals for a greater Army, than could be possibly withstood by the powers of Rome. The text and context make this plain to a Vulgar Reader. For no sooner had the people beheld the miracle, but presently they said, of a truth this was the Prophet 
(m) Ibid. v. 14. , whom they did expect: and if a Prophet, and that Prophet whom they did expect, than who more fit than he to be made their King? Nor to say truth, was our Redeemer a Descendent of the Royal line, but the collateral line of David, none of which ever claimed the Kingdom, or the title of King, or exercised any special power, save Zorobabel only, and that but temporary for the better settling of the people after the Captivity. The Crown being entailed on Solomon and his posterity, ended in jeconiah, the last King of that race: on whom this curse was laid by the Lord himself, that no man of his seed should prosper 
(n) Jer. 22.30. . CHRIST therefore could not be of the seed of that wretched Prince, because we know his work did prosper in his hands, and that he is the Author of all prosperity both to jew and Gentile. And more than so, the self same Prophet telleth us in the following chapter, that the Lord would raise unto David a righteous branch, a King which should both reign and prosper; which is directly contradictory to that before: whose name should be the Lord our righteousness 
(o) Ch. 23.6, 7. ; and must be meant of Christ and of none but him. Though joseph might naturally spring from this jeconiah, (though it remain a question undecided to this very day; whether Salathiel were his natural or adopted son;) yet this derives no title unto CHRIST our Saviour; who was not of the seed of joseph, though supposed his son. Our Saviour's own direct line by his Virgin-Mother was not from Solomon, but Nathan, the son of David; of whom the holy Ghost saith nothing as concerning the Kingdom; for Mary was the daughter of Heli, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, and so forth ascendendo, till we come to Adam, according as it is laid down in the third of Luke. And this I call the line of Christ by his Virgin Mother, on the authority of St. Augustine in some tracts of his, the Author of the Book called De ortu Virgins, extant amongst the works of Hierome, and many late Writers of good credit: besides the testimony of Rabbi Haccanas, the son of Nehemiah, a Doctor of great esteem amongst the jews: 
(p) Cited by Speed in his Tract of Genealog. c. 7.  who telleth us, that there was a Virgin in Bethlehem judah, whose name was Mary, the daughter of Heli, of the kindred of Zerubbabel the son of Salathiel, of the Tribe of judah, who was betrothed to one joseph of the same kindred and Tribe. Nor can I see, to what end St. Luke writing after St. Matthew, and having, doubtless, seen his Gospel, should make another pedigree for joseph then was made already, and that so different from it in the whole composure from Christ to David. I take it therefore for a certain and undoubted truth, that St. Luke reckoneth the descent of our Lord and Saviour, by the line of his Mother the daughter of Heli, (joachim he is called in our Vulgar stories) who is said to be the Father of joseph, because he married his said daughter, as joseph is there said to be the Father of Christ, because he was husband to his Mother. Some other difference there is in these two Genealogies, as that St. Matthew goes no higher than Abraham, and St. Luke followeth his as high as Adam: the reason of the which is both plain and plausible. For Matthew being himself a jew, and writing his Gospel originally in the Hebrew language, for the instruction of that people: could not bethink himself of a better way to gain upon them, then to make proof that Christ our blessed Saviour was the Son of Abraham, in whose seed the whole Nation did expect their blessedness. And on the other side St. Luke being by birth a Gentile, of the City of Antioch, and so by consequence not within the Covenant which was made to Abraham, carrieth on the descent of Christ as high as Adam, who was the common Father both of jews and Gentiles: to show that even the Gentiles were within the Covenant which was made in Paradise, touching the restauration of lost man by the Promised seed.  
For Mary's birth and parentage, I think this sufficient. A little more may here be added of the title of Virgin; because called in this Article the Virgin, as by way of eminency. The Virgin Mary, saith the Article, and not a Virgin known or called by the name of Mary. Somewhat there is in this, there is no doubt of that: whether so much as many do from hence infer, may be made a question. That she continued still a Virgin after Christ's nativity, I am well resolved of: notwithstanding all the cavils made against it by the Ebionites, Helvidius, jovinian, and the Eunomian Heretics. For who can think that joseph after such a revelation from the God of Heaven, that she had conceived with child of the holy Ghost, should offer to converse with her in a conjugal manner: or that the blessed Virgin, if he had attempted it, would have permitted that pure womb, which had been made a Temple of the holy Ghost, to be polluted and profaned with the lust of man? The piety of both parties is a forcible argument to free them from an act so different from all sense of piety. And yet Helvidius and his fellows had some Scripture for it; for even the Devil could come in with his Scriptum est 
(q) Mat. 4.6. , namely that passage in St. Matthew, where it is said of joseph, that he knew her not till she had brought forth her first born son 
(r) Mat. 1.25. . A first born son, say they, doth imply a second; and his not knowing her till then doth tacitly import that he knew her afterwards. And this they fortify with that in the 6. of Mark▪ where not only james and juda and joses and Simon are called his Brethren, but his sisters also are affirmed to be then alive. But the answer unto these Objections was made long ago, St. Hierome in his tractate against Helvidius having fully canvassed them. For first, the first begotten or first born, doth imply no second; that being first, not which hath other things coming after it, but which hath nothing going before it. Et primus ante quem nullus 
(s) Hieron. advers. Helvid. , as the Father hath it. And this appears most evidently by the law of Moses, by which the first born of every creature was to be offered unto God 
(t) Exod. 13.2. . The first born not in reference unto those that are to come after, for then the owner of a flock or herd of cattle might have put off the sacrifice or oblation of the first born of his sheep or kine till he were sure to have a new increase in the place thereof: which the Law by no means would permit. And thus we say in common speech, that Queen jane Seymour died of her first child, and that King Edward the fifth was murdered in the first year of his reign: where past all doubt neither jane Seymour had more children, nor King Edward reigned more years than the first alone. And for the argument from the word until, (or donec peperit, in the Latin) it implies no such matter as is thence collected: the word not having always such an influence as to imply a thing done after, because not before. When Christ promised his Disciples to be with them always, till the end of the world 
(u) Mat. 28.20. : think we his meaning was to forsake them then, that they should neither be with him, nor he with them? I trow no man of wit will say it. And when the Lord said unto his CHRIST, Sat thou on my right hand until I make thine enemies thy footstool 
(x) Psal. 110.1. : may we conclude, that when death, the last enemy shall be overcome, that he shall sit no longer at the Lords right hand. I hope none dare think it. More instances of this kind might be easily had, to show the weakness of this inference, were not these sufficient. And for the Brothers and Sisters mentioned by St. Mark, either they were Joseph's children by a former wife, as Irenaeus 
(y) Iren. adv. haer. l. 1. c. 25. , and likewise all the Greek Fathers downwards, St. Hilary and St. Ambrose amongst the Latins are of opinion: or else his nearest kinsmen (as St. Hierome thinks) which in the Idiom of the jews were accounted Brethren 
(z) Hieron. adv. Helvid. .  
But on the other side our great Masters in the Church of Rome, will not only have her to continue a Virgin, post partum, after the birth, as to the purity of her mind; but also in partu▪ in the birth, as to the integrity of her body. Durand one of their chief Schoolmen will needs have it so, not thinking it a sufficient honour to her to be still a Virgin, non solum carentia experientiae delectationis Venereae, not only by an inexperience of all fleshly pleasure, sed etiam membri corporalis integritate 
(a) Durand. l. 4. d. 44. qu. 6. , but in the clausure of her womb, the dotres whereof (as they conceive) were not opened by it. And unto this most of the great Rabbins of that Church do full well agree. Assuredly these men with a little help might in time come to be of the Turks opinion: who out of a Reverend esteem which they have of Christ will not conceive him to be born or begotten, according to the course of nature: but that the Virgin did conceive him by the smell of a Rose, and after bore him at her breasts. But herein they run cross to the ancient Writers, who though they constantly maintained the perpetual Virginity of the Mother of Christ, yet such a corporal integrity in the act of Childbirth, as these men idly dream of, did they never hold. Tertullian very aptly noteth, that she was Virgo a viro, non virgo a partu 
(b) Tertul. de carn. Chri. in fine. , a Virgin in respect that she knew not man, and yet no Virgin in regard of her bearing a child: which though it were conceived in a wonderful manner, yet ipse patefacti corporis lege, he came into the world by the open way. Pamelius in his notes accounts this and some other passages to this purpose amongst the Paradoxes of Tertullian. So doth Rhenanus too 
(c) Rhenan. in Arg. l. de Car. Chr. , a more modern censurer, and yet confesseth that St. Ambrose was of this opinion; so was St. Hierome too in his second Book against the Pelagians, who holds that Christ first opened those secret passages, though he after shut them up again. According to the judgement of which ancient writers (for those which followed them in time varied somewhat from them) it is the common resolution of the Protestant Schools, that though Christ when he was born of his Virgin Mother, opened the passages of her womb, as all children do, yet she continued still a Virgin, because her mind was free from the thoughts of lust, and that she had conceived of the holy Ghost: nay that he may more properly be said to have opened the womb of Mary his mother, than any other first born do, because he found it shut at the time of his birth, which the first born of the sons of men do not. And being it is confessed by the greatest Schoolmen, that there may be an opening of the womb, without the loss of Virginity, as in the cure of some diseases, or on such an accident of which St. Augustine speaks in his first book De Civit. dei. c. 18. I should much wonder at the stiffness of the Papists in it, but that I know they lay it for a ground work of their doctrine of transubstantiation, and the local being of his body in more places at a time than one, by taking from it all the properties of a natural body.  
But to say truth, they well may free Christ's body from the bands of nature, when they have freed his mother from the bands of sin: not from the sins only of an higher nature, but even from slight and venial sins, as they use to call them; nor yet from actual sins only, but original also. To what this great exemption tends, we shall see anon. In the mean time we may take notice that this exemption from the guilt of original sin, is but a new opinion taken up of late, and not yet generally agreed on amongst them: there having been great conflicts about this privilege, between Scotus and the Franciscans on the one side, Aquinas and the Dominicans on the other. But in the end, the devotions of the common people being strongly bend unto the service of our Lady, the Franciscans carried it. Sixtus the 4. who had been formerly of that Order, not only ratifying by his Bulls their doctrine of her immaculate conception, Ann. 1476. But for the further glory of it confirming a new festival on the 8▪ of December, which in honour of her said conception the Canons of the Church of Lions had of late begun. After when as the doctrine of original sin was agitated and debated in the Council of Trent, this Controversy was as hotly followed, as if the Pope had never determined it. Nor would the Council bring it unto any conclusion, for fear of giving offence to the side condemned 
(a) Concil. Trident. Sess. 5. ; and therefore very warily did so state the point, as neither to exempt the Virgin from original sin, nor include her under the obnoxiousness and guilt thereof. Declarat Synodus non sibi esse propositum decreto hoc (they mean the Canons which they made touching that particular) B. Virginem comprehendere. For my part, I am loath to rob this most happy instrument of our Redemption, of any privilege or exemption, whatsoever it be, which may consist with the analogy of faith, and the texts of Scripture. But when I find in holy Scripture, that CHRIST came into the world to save sinners 
(b) 1 Tim. 1.15 , and that the Virgin did rejoice in God her Saviour 
(c) Luk. 1.47. ; either I must conclude that she was a sinner, (if guilty only of original sin, it shall serve my turn) or else that she needed not a Saviour. And when I read it in Nicephorus that she died in the 59 year of her age, and was attended to her grave by all the Apostles met together, not by chance, but miracle 
(d) Nicep. Histor. Eccl. l. 2 ; I cannot but conclude her under the Law of sin, or else she had not been subject to the stroke of death; which is the wages of sin 
(e) Rom. 6.23.  as St. Paul hath told us. No Saviour, if no sinner; if no sin, no death. It must be either both or none, there's no question of it. But it is easy to discern what this tends unto; I mean the great care taken by the Church of Rome, to free this blessed woman from all manner of sin and humane infirmity. Their meaning is to seat her in the throne of heaven, and place her in the Mediatorship between God and man, whereof she were not capable, if she were a sinner.  
By what degrees they came at last unto this height is not hard to show. They went it seems, on that old Philosophical maxim, that the way to make strait a crooked stick, was to bend it quite the other way. This way was followed first on mistaken zeal, and afterwards pursued upon worldly prudence, Helvidius and those other Heretics before remembered, would not allow her just attribute, the Virgin Mary, affirming with an high hand of impudence, eam post Christum natum viro suo fuisse commixtam, that after our Redeemers birth she was known by joseph. This was encountered presently with another extreme, the writers of the following times not only making her a Virgin in all mental purity, but in corporal integrity also, 
(f) Durand. l. 4. d. 44. qu. 6.  contrary to the judgement of Tertullian, Ambrose, Hierom, before remembered, and generally of the Greek Fathers, hardly one excepted: the Schoolmen thereupon devising this trim distinction, to reconcile those ancients to their new opinion, that Christ was brought into the world, non fractione aliqua membrorum, sed dilatatione meatuum 
(g) Maldonas. in Luk. 2. . The Antidicomaritani, an old brood of Heretics, devested her (as their name imports) of all manner of righteousness, making her not more holy than another woman 
(h) Epiphan. advers. haeres. . And on the other side the Collyridians' in dislike of this peevish humour, placed her above the reach of nature, afforded her divine honours, a dressing up a four square Chariot, (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as my Author calls it) did thereon sacrifice unto her as an heavenly Deity 
(i) Id. ibid. haeres. 79. . The Schoolmen treading in the steps of these Collyridians', and having little else to do then to broach new fancies, first freed her from all mortal, then from venial sins; from actual first, and after from original also. And this the Champions of that Church have more hotly followed, because the Magdeburgians and some other of the Protestant Doctors, have made a muster of many crimes (infirmities they might have called them, had they been so pleased) with which they do as hotly charge her. Nestorius' once Patriarch of Constantinople, though he allowed her the title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or the Mother of Christ; would not allow her to be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or the Mother of God (and 'tis an expression I confess, which at the first hearing doth not sound so handsomely). In opposition unto whom, cyril of Alexandria and the rest of the Prelates at that time (having condemned his doctrine of the two natures in Christ, in the third General Council) did heap upon her all those Attributes, which might manifest their dislike of him and his cause together. Insomuch as Cyril doth not stick to call her in these early days 
(k) Cyr. come. Nestor. Hom. 6. , pretiosum totius orbis thesaurum, i. e. the most precious treasure of the world, a lamp which cannot be put out, the crown of Chastity, the very sceptre of true doctrine, (sceptrum verae doctrinae) and not the sceptre of the Catholic faith as our Rhemists read it 
(l) Annot. in Act. 1.14. . And so far there was no harm done, as long as those of Rome would contain themselves within the bounds prescribed by the ancient Fathers, whose pious flourishes, devout meditations, and Rhetorical Apostrophe's, aimed at nothing else, than the commemoration of her faith and piety. But let us look on the extravagancies of the writers of succeeding times, and we shall find, that Anselm giveth this reason, why Christ, when ascended, left his Mother here, Ne curiae coelesti veniret in dubium, etc. 
(m) Anselm. de excel. B. Virg. ●. 17.  lest else the Court of heaven should have been distracted, whom they should first go out to meet, their Lord, or their Lady. That Bernardin Senensis doth not stick to say, Mariam plura fecisse Deo, quam fecit Deus toti generi humano, that she did more to Christ in being his Mother 
(n) Bern. Senens. Serm. 61. , than Christ to all mankind in being their Saviour. That Gabriel Biel a Schoolman of good name and credit, hath shared the government of the world betwixt God and her; God keeping justice to himself, Misericordia Virgini concessa 
(o) Biel in Canone Missae. Sect. 80. , and left to her the free dispensing of his Mercies. That Petrus Damianus tells us, that when she mediates with her Son for any of her special votaries, Non rogat ut Ancilla, sed imperat ut Domina 
(p) De Nativit. B. Mariae Serm. , she begs not of him as a handmaid, but commands as a Mistress: that Bonaventure in composing our Lady's Psalter, hath applied to her, whatever was intended by the holy Ghost to the advancement of the honour of her Lord and Saviour 
(q) Psalt. Bonavent. Edit. An. 1596. : that she is called frequently in their public Rituals, Mater misericordiae, Mater gratiae, Regina coeli, with other the like glorious title which she dares not own: that in the vulgar translation made Authentic by the Council of Trent, in stead of He shall break thy head 
(r) Gen. 3.15.  which relates to Christ, they read it, Ipsa conteret caput tuam, she shall break thy head, which many of their Commentators do refer to her: that Bellarmine maketh at all, no difference betwixt the Veneration which is due to her, and that which doth belong unto Christ, as man: and finally that the vulgar sort in point of practice (for needs such practice must ensue on such desperate doctrines) do use to say so many Ave Maries for one single Pater noster 
(s) Relation of Sr. Edw. Sandys , hear day by day so many masses of our Ladies, and not one of Christ's, adorn her images with all cost and cunning which man's wit can reach, whilst his poor Statues stand neglected as not worth the looking after. Wonder it is they have not practised on the Creed, and told us how the Apostles had mistake the matter when they drew it up, and that it was not Jesus Christ but the Virgin Mary that suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead and buried for the sins of man. Such are, and such have been the most known repugnancies, which have found entertainment in the Christian world, touching the Privileges and Prierogatives of this blessed woman. Between these two extremes is the virtue placed which I persuade myself, hath been most happily preserved in the Church of England, retaining still two annual feasts instituted in the best times to her name and memory. We gladly give her all the honour which is due unto her, account her for the most blessed of all women 
(t) Luk. 1.42. , a choice and most selected Temple of the holy Ghost, and happiest instrument of man's good, which hath descended simply from the loins of Adam: but dare not give her divine honour, by erecting Altars to her service, going in pilgrimage to her shrines, or pouring forth our prayers unto her. Finally we resolve with Epiphanius 
(u) Epiphan. in haeres. 79. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Let the blessed Virgin be had in reverence, but God only worshipped; let her possess principal place in our good opinions, so she have none in our devotions. But it is time to leave the Mother, and return again unto the Son.  
Now that which in this Article is expressed by the present words, Natus ex Virgin Maria, that is to say, born of the Virgin Mary, in that of Nice is thus delivered, and was made man. Some Heretics had formerly called this truth in question, affirming that our Saviour's body was not true and real, but only an eyrie and imaginary body, as did the Marcionites; others, that he received not his humane being of the Virgin Mary, but brought his body from the heavens, and only passed thorough her womb, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as thorough a Conduit pipe; as Valentinian 
(x) Epiphan. advers. Valent. : as if our blessed Lord and Saviour had only borrowed for a time the shape of man, therein to act his woeful tragedy on the public Theatre of the world, and made the Virgin's womb his trying house. And some again there were who did conceive his body to be free from passion, maintaining that it was impassibilis, and that he was not subject to those natural frailties and infirmities, which are incident to the Sons of men by the ordinary course of nature. To meet with these and other Heretics of this kind, the Fathers in the Nicene Council, expressed our Saviour's being born of the Virgin Mary, which every Heretic had wrested to his proper sense, in words which might more fully signify the truth and reality of his taking of our flesh upon him, in words which were not capable of so many evasions, declaring thus, that being incarnate by the holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, factus est homo, he was made man; and consequently was made subject unto those infirmities, which are inseparably annexed to our humane nature. This, that which positively is affirmed by the Apostle in his Epistle to the Hebrews 
(y) Heb. 4.15. , where it is said, that we have not such an high Priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities, but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. The high Priest which God gave us in the time of the Gospel, was to be such as those he gave unto his people in the time of the Law; one who could have compassion on the ignorant, and on them▪ that are out of the way, for that he himself is compassed also with infirmities 
(z) Heb. 5.2. . The difference only stood in this, that our Saviour's passions and infirmities were free from sin, and neither did proceed from sin or incline him to it, as do the passions and infirmities of men merely natural; which is the meaning of St. Paul in the place aforesaid, where he affirmeth of our high Priest, that he was tempted, that is to say, afflicted, tried and proved in all things, like as we are, save only that it was without sin, or sinful motions. And to this truth the Catholic Doctors of the Church do attest unanimously. St. Ambrose thus, CHRIST, saith he, took upon him not the show, but the truth, and reality of the flesh; what then? Debuit ergo et dolorem suscipere ut vinceret tristitiam 
(a) Ambros. in Luc. l. 10. , non excluderet; he therefore was to have a sense of humane sorrows, that he might overcome them, not exclude them only. Fulgentius goes to work more plainly 
(b) Fulgent. ad Thrasimund. 3. , Nunc oftendendum est, saith he, etc. Now must we show, that the passions of grief, sorrow, fear, etc. do properly pertain unto the soul; and that our Saviour did endure them all in his humane soul, ut veram totam● in se cum suis infirmitatibus hominis demonstraret suscepti substantiam, that he might show in himself the true and whole substance of man accompanied with its infirmities. The fathers of the Greek Church do affirm the same 
(c) Cyr. Thesaur. l. 10. c. 3.  When thou hearest (saith Cyril) that Christ wept, feared, and sorrowed, acknowledge him to be a true man, and ascribe these things to the nature of man: for Christ took a mortal body subject to all the passions of nature, sin always excepted. Which when he had affirmed in thesi, he doth thus infer, Et ita singulas passiones carnis, etc. Thus shalt thou find all the passions or affections of the flesh to be stirred in Christ, but without sin, that being so stirred up they might be repressed, and our nature reform to the better. But none of all the Ancients state the point more clearly than john Damascene, in his 3. book De fide orthodoxa 
(d) Damasc●n l. 3. c. 20. , where he tells us this, We confess, saith he, that Christ did take unto him all natural and blameless passions: for he assumed the whole man, and all that pertained to man, save sin. Natural and blameless passions are those which are not properly in our power, and whatsoever entered into man's life through the occasion of (adam's) sin, as hunger, thirst, weakness, labour, weeping, shunning of death, fear, agony, whence came sweat with drops of blood. These things are in all men by nature; and therefore Christ took all these to him, that he might sanctify them all. With this agreeth the distinction of the latter Schoolmen, who divide the infirmities of the flesh into natural, and personal 
(e) Feild of the Ch. l. 5. c. 17. , calling those natural which follow the whole nature of man, as hunger, thirst, labour, weariness, and even death itself; those personal which arise out of some defect or imperfection in the constitution of the body, or disorder of diet, or from some other outward cause, as Agues, Leprosies, and the like. Then they infer, that all the frailties and infirmities (you may call them punishments if you will, as indeed they are) that are from without, and are common to the whole nature of man, were taken with our flesh by Christ, who came to be a Saviour of all men, without respect of persons; but such as flow from sin dwelling within, or proceed from particular causes and are proper only unto some, those he took not on him. And of these passions and infirmities attendant on Christ's humane nature, I have spoke the rather in this place, because it doth so manifestly conduce to the better understanding of the following Article, viz. his sufferings of all sorts under Pontius Pilate.    

ARTICLE V. Of the fifth ARTICLE OF THE CREED Ascribed to St. PHILIP. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. i e. Passus est sub Pontio Pilato; crusifixus, mortuus, & sepultus. i e. Suffered under Ponce Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried.  

CHAP. V. Of the sufferings of our Saviour under Pontius Pilate; and first of those temptations which he suffered at the hands of the Devil.  
FOr the finding out of the time of our Saviour's Birth, St. Luke hath given us these two notes and characters, the Presidentship of Cyrenius over Syria 
(a) Luk. 2.1, 2. , and the taxing of all the world by Augustus Caesar, in the time of his (Cyrenius) government. And for the finding out the time of our Saviour's sufferings, he hath given us most undoubted notes also, such as cannot fail us. 
(b) Luk. 3.1, 2.  In the fifteenth year (saith he) of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being Governor of Judaea, and Herod being Tetrarch of Galilee, his brother Philip of Iturea, and Lysanias of Abylene, Annas and Caiaphas being High Priests, the Word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the Wilderness: which was the first year of our Saviour's Ministry, and consequently of those sufferings, whereof there hath been any notice taken in the Book of God. Now in this punctual list of names, that of most consideration in this present business is Pontius pilate's; being only mentioned in the Creed: of whom we shall say somewhat in the way of preamble, his name not being inserted here for nothing; and then descend unto our Observations on the present Article. But first we will remove a rub that hath stumbled many, which is the making of Annas and Caiaphas to be both high Priests at the same time, being a thing so plainly contrary both to the law and practice of the jewish state. Certum est duos simul Pontifices eodem simul tempore Sacerdotium nunquam occupasse 
(c) Calvin in Harmon. Evangel. . And so much is confessed by Calvin, though in the salving of the difficulty he mistakes the matter: affirming contrary to the Evangelist, non esse eundem ambobus titulum, that they did not both enjoy the Title, but that Caiaphas did suffer Annas, who was his Father in law, to participate in the honour with him, and be half-sharer as it were in that eminent dignity. As wide as this shoots the great Cardinal Baronius 
(d) Baron. Annal. Eccl. An. 31. n. , who will have Annas be the high Priest properly, and Caiaphas to be called so only, because he was one of the heads of those 24 Orders, into which David had divided the sons of Aaron: whereas his own Vulgar could inform him, that those heads are always called Primarii Sacerdotes, & Principes Sacerdotum, the chief Priests as our English reads it, but Summi Sacerdotes, or the high Priests, never. Nor doth Eusebius shoot much nearer, (and I wonder at it) who doth salve it thus, 
(e) Euseb. Eccle. hist. l. 1. c 11.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. i. e. that Christ began his Ministry under Annas, and ended it under Caiaphas, about four years after: whereas it is manifest by josephus whom Eusebius citeth, that Annas was removed from the high Priesthood by Valerius Gratus 
(f) joseph. Ant. jud. l. 18.3. , being then Lord Lieutenant of the Province of jewry, who left that Government to Pontius Pilate in the twelfth year of Tiberius Caesar, being three years at least before the beginning of our Saviour's ministry. Others conceive that Annas only was high Priest, and that Caiaphas was his Sagan, or the second high Priest 
(g) jos. Scal. in Prolegom. ad Euseb. Chron. , i. e. his Coadjutor or Assistant, (which being he was his son in law, may not seem unprobable); such an Assistant in dispatch of the public service, as the Syncellus of late times was to the Patriarches of Constantinople. But that which seems most probable in my opinion, his, that Annas was high Priest de jure, and Caiaphas, de facto. For howsoever Annas was put out by Valerius Gratus, yet being once consecrated to that Office he was still high Priest de jure, as in point of right, and so esteemed of by the jews, to whom such innovations in their forms of Government were not very pleasing; and that Caiaphas though high Priest de facto, did yet ascribe so much to the right of Annas, as to let him have a leading power in all great affairs. Which appears evidently in this, that Christ was carried first to the house of Annas, and examined there 
(h) Joh. 18. v. 13. & 24. , and after sent by him to the house of Caiaphas, to which the chief Priests, Scribes and Pharisees were convened together. And now to come to Pontius Pilate, he was made Governor of judaea (as before was said) in the twelfth year of Tiberius Caesar, upon the calling back of Valerius Gratus. A man he was of an austere and rigid nature, Vir pertinaci duroque ingenio, as it is in Philo 
(i) Philo de legate, ad Caium. , and for the first essay of his future Government, had caused the images of Caesar to be secretly brought into Jerusalem, with an intent no doubt to place them in the holy Temple 
(k) joseph. de bell. jud. l. 2. c. 8. . This caused a great tumult in the City, and the Country people joining with them, they went altogether to him to Caesarea desiring Pilate to remove those Images, and to preserve the ancient laws and liberties of their Country. Which when he stiffly did refuse to give ear unto, and that the jews as stoutly were resolved not to be denied, they offered him with one consent their naked throats, protesting openly (with great alacrity and consent) that they had rather be all cut in pieces then permit the Law of God to be so defiled. At sight whereof he did let fall his resolution, and in reward of such a brave and noble courage, (especially not knowing otherwise how to quiet the people) he was contented to remove them; which was done accordingly. Another time saith the same josephus, he had a mind to rob the Corban, or the public treasure of the Temple, under pretence of making Conduits in the City 
(l) Id. ibid. & A●i. l. 18. c. 4. . Which when the people understood, they rose up in a tumult, and being called to appear before him, sitting in his Tribunal or Judgement Seat, he caused the Soldiers of his Guard to fall upon them, not with swords but staves, who wounded many, and killed some; and for the rest, falling on one another in an hasty flight (as commonly men do in such affrightments) they came unto a wretched and calamitous end. Such another wicked and ungodly act was the slaughter of the Galileans, who being more tender conscienced then the rest of the jews, would not (as they did) offer sacrifice for the health of the Romans, and therefore came not to the Temple, the place of sacrifice, but held their Congregations, and performed their sacrifices by themselves apart 
(m) Baron Annal. Eccl. . This coming unto pilate's ear, and notice being given withal when they met together, he caused his men of war to fall upon them, and most cruelly put them to the sword. And these were those poor Galileans which the Gospel speaks of 
(n) Luk. 13.1. , whose blood Pilate is there said to have intermingled with their Sacrifices. This was not long before the time of our Saviour's death, that is to say, about the third year of his Ministry. So that being in himself of a barbarous and cruel nature, and fleshed in a continual course of shedding blood, he was the more like to serve the turn of those murderous jews, whom nothing else would satisfy but the death of the Saviour, their crucifying of their long expected Messiah. What became of him afterwards, I shall let you know towards the conclusion of this Article, when he had put an end, by death, to those many temptations and afflictions which our Saviour suffered, during the time of his command. This is enough by the way of Preamble to give the reader a short touch and character of him: and so to let him see with what truth and plainness S. Austin tells us of the man 
(o) August. Serm. de Temp. 131. , that he was put into the Creed or Symbol, not for the merit of his person, (propter signationem temporis, non propter dignitatem personae, as the Father hath it) but for the pointing out of the time of our Saviour's passion; which he doth also touch at in his Encheiridion to Laurentius, cap. 5. And so much briefly shall suffice for this present time touching the life and manners of this Pontius Pilate, under whom CHRIST suffered; let us next look upon Christ's sufferings under Pontius Pilate.  
Now for the sufferings of our Saviour they may be principally divided into internal and external; the inward or internal being either temptations or afflictions, the outward or external, either shame or corporal punishments: and these again may be considered either as being inflicted on him before his crucifying, or in the act of crucifixion. Of these the first were those temptations which were laid before him by the Devil, immediately upon his Baptism, at the performance of which ceremony he was acknowledged by john Baptist to be the Lamb of God which taketh away the sins of the world 
(p) Joh. 1.29 ; anointed for his following Ministry by the unction of the holy Spirit, descending visibly upon him in the shape of a dove; and publicly proclaimed by a voice from heaven to be the beloved Son of God in whom he was well pleased 
(q) Mat. 3.16, 17. . This is the first alarm which the Devil took, and it concerned him to betake himself to his weapons presently. The Devil was an expert warrior, and was resolved not to be set upon in his own Dominions, but to give the first blow, as we use to say, and take the enemy whom he feared, at the best advantages which were presented, and as unprovided as he could. And therefore he drew after him into the Wilderness of judaea, into which our Saviour had been led by the holy Ghost. 
(r) Mat. 4.1.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, He was led into the Wilderness by the Spirit, as St. Matthew hath it, that is to say, a Spiritu Sanctitatis, as the Translator of the Syriack, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by the holy Spirit, as we read in Chrysostom. And so no question but it was. For by what spirit else but the Spirit of God could he be led into the Wilderness, to whom all other spirits in the world were subject, as they themselves confess in sundry places of the Gospel? especially considering that the word is a word of violence, such as our Lord and Saviour was not subject to. For though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in St. Matthew be a word more gentle, and may imply a peaceable and quiet leading; yet in St. Mark we find, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that he was driven into the Wilderness by the Spirit: the holy Ghost or Spirit of God conducting him into the Desert, half against his will; that is to say, with such reluctance in his will (considering to what end he was carried thither, which was ut tentaretur a Diabulo, that he might be tempted of the Devil) as many of God's Saints have found within themselves, distracted between hope and fear, upon the undertaking of some dangerous enterprise. Of which St. Chrysostom in his Homilies on St. Matthew 
(s) Chrysost. in Mat. 4.  gives us this good note, that we are not rashly and unadvisedly to thrust ourselves into temptations; which is a thing so contrary to Christ's example, though we are bound by his example to resist temptations, as often as the Devil doth suggest them to us. In which it is a great part of our Christian duty to call upon the Lord our God, that he would be pleased not to lead us into temptation, or if he do, that he would graciously deliver us from the evil of it: and doing so to be assured that no temptation shall be laid upon us 
(u) 1 Cor. 10.12, 13. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but such as incident to man, and may well be born; that God will not suffer us to be tempted beyond our power, but will make way for us to escape, that being tried in this fiery furnace of temptation, we may receive that Crown of life which the Lord hath promised to all those which overcome it 
(x) Jam. 1.13. .  
Now in this story of the temptations of our Saviour, there are these three parts to be considered, the place, the preparation, and the temptation itself. The place or scene of this great action was the Wilderness of judaea, as before we said: not the inhabited parts thereof (for there were many villages interspersed therein, as commonly there are in all great Forests) but those which were the furthest and the most remote from humane society. The spirit led him not (saith Chrysostom) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, into the City or the Market place, but into the Wilderness; and more than so, into the least frequented and most savage part of it, where he conversed with none but Beasts, as St. Mark informs us 
(y) Mar. 1.13. . And this was done on great and weighty considerations. First, he was led into the Wilderness, the better to comply with the type or figure of the Levitical Scape-goat, 
(z) Levit. 16. v. 10.21, 22. , of which it is thus said in Scripture, that the Goat on which the lot fell to be the Scape-goat, shall be presented alive before the Lord, to make an atonement with him: And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon his head, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the Goat, and shall send him away by the hands of a fit man into the Wilderness; And the Goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited, and he shall let go the Goat in the Wilderness. A Type or Figure most punctually agreeing with the Antitype, with our Redeemers going into the Desert, to a land not inhabited. No sooner had he been declared by St. john the Baptist, to be the Lamb of God which taketh away the sins of the world; no sooner was the burden of our iniquities laid upon his head; but presently he is led by the holy Spirit, as by the hands of a fit man, into the midst of the Wilderness. And though some of the ancient writers, as justin Martyr 
(a) In dialog. contr. Tryph. jud. , and Tertullian 
(b) Contr. Martion. lib. 3. , refer this figure of the Scape-goat to our Saviour's passion; and some of later times to his resurrection: yet in my mind Calvin hath hit more happily on the right application, than any of those which went before him. By whom it is conceived, and rightly, that of the two Goats which were brought before the Lord, the one was offered for a Sacrifice after the manner of the Law, the other was sent forth alive to be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as a thing devoted to destruction for others 
(c) Calv. Com. in Rentateuch. . For though (saith he) a more curious speculation may be brought, as that the sending away of the Scape-goat was a figure of Christ's Resurrection: yet I embrace that which is more plain and certain, that the Goat sent away alive and free was vice piaculi, as a thing devoted to bear the brunt for others, that by his departure and leading away into the Wilderness, the people might be assured that their sins did vanish, and were carried away far out of sight.  
A second cause of leading our Saviour into the Wilderness, and to the parts thereof most retired from company, was to the end (as the same Calvin is of opinion) that he might undertake the Office of a public Teacher, and an Ambassador from heaven with the more authority, 
(d) Calvin in Ha●mon. Evangel,  tanquam magise Coelo missus quam assumptus ex oppido aliquo & communi hominum grege, as being rather sent from heaven then taken out of any town or place of ordinary commerce. For so was Moses taken up by God into Mount Sinai, tanquam in Coeleste sacrarium, as into one of the revestries of the highest heavens, before the promulgating of the Law: and so Elias in like manner, Qui instaurandae legis Minister erat, whom God made choice of to restore his Law to its primitive lustre, was by the Lord withdrawn aside to the Mount of Horeb, situate in the remotest part of this very Wilderness. In this particular both Moses and Elias had been types of Christ, who was to be the Mediator of a better Covenant 
(d) Heb. 8.6. , i. e. a Covenant established upon better promises; and therefore Christ to be conform to them in this particular, lest he should seem in any thing to fall short of them. The third and last consideration which occasioned the leading of our Saviour into the Wilderness, was to afford the better opportunity unto Satan, to pursue his business, to tempt and try him to the purpose. For as St. chrysostom well observes, 
(e) Chrysost. in c. 4. Mat. Hom.  the Devil never is more busy to tempt men to sin, than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, when he finds them left unto themselves without help or company. This opportunity he took to seduce poor Eve, when she was all alone, and without her husband; and speeding then so well in that great attempt, hath ever since made use of the like advantages. He found our Saviour in the Wilderness, and more than so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the most inaccessible places of it, saith the same St. Chrysostom 
(f) Id. Ibid. ; so that the loneliness of the place, seemed to concur with other circumstances, (especially his beginning to be hungry after so long and great a fast) to animate the old Tempter to give the onset, and to befool himself with the hopes of Victory. But here the Devil was deceived in his expectation, and gave himself the overthrow by his too much forwardness; falling into the hands of that promised seed, 
(f) Gen. 3.15.  of which he had been told in the beginning of time, it should break his head.  
The second thing to be considered in this story of the Temptation of our Saviour, is the Preparation; which is thus laid down by the Evangelists, 
(g) Matth. 4.2.  And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterwards an hungered. For then the Tempter came unto him; so St. Matthew hath it. But 
(h) Luk. 4.1, 2, 3.  St. Luke thus, He was led by the Spirit into the Wilderness, being forty days tempted of the Devil, and in those days he did eat nothing, and when they were ended he afterwards hungered; and the Devil said unto him, etc. St. Mark more briefly, and with some difference from the other two. And he was in the Wilderness forty days, and was tempted of Satan 
(i) Mar. 1.13. . Which different narration of these three Evangelists hath produced a doubt amongst the learned touching the very moment and point of time, when the Devil first began his onset (whereof more anon) but they do all well agree in this, that he fasted forty days, and forty nights, being the whole time that he continued in the Wilderness. And herein divers things are to be considered; First, why our Saviour chose this time for so great a work. Secondly, Why he fasted forty days and forty nights, neither more nor less; And thirdly, what was after done by the Church of God in reference to this great example. And first it may be thought that he chose this time, because he then began to set himself in more special manner to the great work of our Redemption; which was not to be wrought but by humbling of himself for us, under the mighty hand of his heavenly Father; and fasting is a special act of humiliation: in which respect the Church hath taught us thus to pray in her public Liturgies; O Lord which for our sakes did fast forty days and forty nights, &c. 
(k) Collection on the first sunday of Lent. , Secondly we may think that he chose this time, that by this exercise of fasting he might prepare and fit himself for the discharge of the Prophetical Office, the function of the holy Ministry, which he was pleased to take upon him. Not that he needed in himself, to whom God had not given the spirit by rule or measure 
(l) Joh. 3.34. , but partly to comply with the examples of Moses and Elias in the former times, who had both betook themselves to fasting on the like occasions: and partly to leave an example to his Church, which they were to follow, in calling men unto the Ministry of the Gospel. Which Precedent as we find it followed in the Ordination of Paul and Barnabas and other Presbyters of the Church, in the best and Apostolical times 
(m) Act. 13.3 etc. 14 v. 23. : so gave it a fair hint to the times succeeding, to institute four solemn times of public fasting, (which they called jejunia quatuor temporum, we the Ember-weeks to be the set and solemn times of giving Orders, in the Church, and calling men unto the Ministry of the same; to the end that all the people might by prayer and fasting apply themselves unto the Lord; humbly beseeching him to direct the Fathers of the Church to make choice of fit and able labourers to attend his harvest, as also to enable those who are called unto it, and give them gifts and graces fitting for so great a business. Which ancient institution of the Church of God, as it is prudently retained in this Church of England, according to the 32 Canon of the year 1603. in which all Ordinations of Presbyters and Deacons are restrained to those four set times: so were it to be wished that the same authority would establish public meetings and set forms of Prayer to be observed at those times, that so with one consent of heart both Priests and people might commend that religious work to the care and blessings of the Lord; according as it was directed in the Common-Prayer Book intended for the use of the Church of Scotland. There was another reason which induced our Saviour to make choice of this time for his fast; which was, the better to draw on the Tempter to begin his assault, but this will better fall within the compass of the third general point to be considered in this story, that is to say, the main act of it, or the temptation itself.  
In the mean time we may consider what might be the reason, why he fasted forty days and forty nights, neither more nor less. In which it is first to be observed that it is not only said that he fasted forty days, and no more than so, but forty days and forty nights. Which caution was observed by St. Matthew for this reason, chiefly left else it might be thought by some carnal Gospelers that he fasted only after the manner of the jews, whose use it was to eat a sparing meal at night, having religiously fasted all the day before. Si ergo diceretur quod Christus jejunaret quadraginta diebus, (without making mention of the nights) intelligeretur quod per noctes comedebat sicut Judaeis solitum erat 
(n) Tostat. in Mat. 4. qu. 11. , as Tostatus notes upon the Text (which also is observed by Maldonat, jansenius, and some other of the Romish Writers) and then there had been little in it of a miracle, either to work upon the jews, or confound the Devil. As well then forty nights as forty days to avoid that cavil. And there was very good reason too why he should fast just forty days and forty nights, neither more nor less. Had he fasted fewer days than forty, he had fallen short of the examples which both Moses and Elias left behind them on the like occasions; (on like occasion, I confess, but on less by far) both which were by the Lord enabled to so long a fast, that by the miracle thereof they might confirm unto the jews the truth of their doctrine. For seeing that they fasted longer than the strength of nature could endure; it must needs be that they were both assisted by the God of nature, whose service and employment they were called unto. And though perhaps a longer and more wonderful fasting might have been expected from our Saviour considering both who he was, and of how much a better and more glorious Ministry he was to be employed by the Lord his God: yet he resolved not to exceed the former number, nor to make use of that assistance which he might easily have had of those blessed Angels, who as St. Mark saith, ministered unto him 
(o) Mark. 1.13. . And this he did upon two reasons. First, to demonstrate to the world, Evangelium non dissentire a lege & Prophetis, as St. Austin hath it 
(p) August. Ep. 119. ad januar. , what an excellent harmony there was between the Law and the Prophets (whereof Moses and Elias were of most eminent consideration) and that his own most glorious and holy Gospel, of which he was to be the Preacher: and secondly, lest peradventure by a longer and more unusual kind of fast, than any of the former ages had given witness to, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as we read in Chrysostom 
(q) Chrysost. hom. in Matth. , the truth of his humanity, his taking of our flesh upon him, might be called in question. Of any mystery which should be in the number of forty, more than in another, I am not Pythagorean enough to conceive a thought, no not so much as in my dreams; as never having been affected with that kind of Theology, or the like curious and impertinent nothings. Nor am I apt to think, as many of the Papists do, that men are bound by any Precept of our Saviour or of his Apostles to observe the like fast of forty days, which we call commonly by the name of Lent; (jejunium-quadragesimale in the Latin Writers) or that his glorious and divine example was purposely proposed unto us for our imitation, as some others think. The silence of the Evangelical Scriptures which say nothing in it, and the unability of our weak nature to imitate an action of so vast a difficulty, are arguments sufficient to persuade the contrary: such as have finally prevailed on jansenius and other modest Romanists, to wave the plea of imitation, and to ascribe the keeping of the Lent fast to such other reasons, as shall be presently produced in maintenance of that ancient and religious observance. And on the other side I will not advocate for Calvin, (as I see some do) who being at enmity with all the ancient rites and Ordinances of the Church of Christ, doth not alone affirm that the keeping of it in imitation of our Saviour is mera stultitia, in plain terms, a flat piece of foolery 
(r) Calvin, in Harmon. Evangel. : but tells us also of the Fathers who observed this fast, that they did ludere ineptiis ut simiae, play like old Apes with their own Antics; chargeth them with I know not what ridiculous zeal, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as he calls it; and finally affirms the whole fast so kept, to be impium & detestabile Christi ludibrium, a detestable and ungodly mockage of our Saviour Christ, whether with less charity or wisdom, I can hardly say.  
For (that I may crave leave to digress a little) most sure it is that the Lent fast, according as it was observed in the Primitive times, was not alone of special use to the advancement of true godliness and increase of piety; but also of such reverend Antiquity that it hath very good right and title to be reckoned amongst the Apostolical Traditions, which have been recommended to the Church of God. The Canons attributed to the Apostles, which if not theirs, (as many learned men do conceive they are) are questionless of very venerable Antiquity, do thus speak for Lent, Can. 69. Si quis Episcopus aut Presbyter, i. e. If a Bishop, Priest, or Deacon, or of any other holy Order, kept not the holy fast of Lent, let him be degraded, unless it be in case of sickness: Si laicus sit, Communione privetur, but if a Layman do not keep it, let him be debarred from the Communion. Ignatius one of the Apostles scholars, and one who, as it is believed, saw Christ in the flesh; in his Epistle to the Philippians doth advise them thus. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Let none despise the Fast of Lent; for it contains the imitation of our Lord's example: which is full enough. Tertullian the most ancient of the Latin Fathers whose works are extant in the world 
(s) Tertul. adv. Psychicos. , speaks of it by the name of jejunium Paschatos, or the Easter fast, (because it doth immediately precede that solemn festival) and reckoneth it amongst those public orders which the Church was bound to keep from the first beginning; though then he was an enemy to all public orders, and an open Montanist. St. Ambrose a most godly Bishop, accounts it as a special gift and blessing of Almighty God 
(t) Ambr. serm. 40. in Feria 3. post. dominic. 2. Quadr. , (Hanc quadragesiman largitus est nobis Dominus, etc.) that he appointed Lent unto prayer and fasting. And Leo, a right good and godly man too, though a Pope of Rome, affirmeth positively, 
(u) Leo Serm. 4.4. de quadrages.  Magna divinae institutionis salubritate provisum esse, etc. that it was ordained by divine Institution for the cleansing and purging of the soul from the filths of sin. Not that they thought there did occur any Precept for it, delivered in the Volume of the Book of God, (we must not so conceive or conclude their meaning): but that both for the time of the year and the set number of days, they had a special eye to this fast of Christ's, as to the most convenient direction which the Church could give them. St. Hierome though he make it not a divine institution, yet reckoneth it for an Apostolical Tradition (which is as much as the two former do affirm, rightly understood); saying 
(x) Hieron. ad Marcellum advers. Montan.  Nos unam Quadragesimam secundum traditionem Apostolorum, etc. that is to say, We fast one Lent in the whole year; at a fit and seasonable time, according to the tradition of the holy Apostles. Finally St. Augustine speaks thereof, as a most wholesome and religious institution, of great antiquity and use in the Church of Christ, not only in his 74. Sermon de Diversis, and the 64. of those de Tempore, whereof some question hath been made amongst learned men; but also in his Epistle unto januarius 
(y) August. Epistola. 119. c. 15. , of the authority whereof never doubt was raised. And here I might proceed to St. Basil, Chrysostom, and other the renowned lights of the Eastern Churches; but that sufficient to this purpose hath been said already, especially for us and for our instruction, who have been always counted for a Member of the Western Church. Now as the institution of this Lent-fast is of great antiquity, so was it first ordained and instituted upon such warrantable grounds, as kept it free from all debate and disputation till these later times: save that Aerius would needs broach this monstrous Paradox, (for which he stills stands branded as a wretched Heretic) Non celebranda esse statuta jejunia 
(z) August. de haeres. , sed cum quisque voluerit jejunandum; that no set fasts were to be kept, neither Lent, nor others, but that it should be left to men's Christian liberty. For whereas it is very fit 
(a) Field of the Church, l. 3.19. , (as a learned man of this Church very well observes) that there be a solemn time at lest once in the year, wherein men may call themselves to an account for their negligences, repent them of all their evil doings, and with prayers, fasting, and mourning turn unto the Lord: this time was thought to be the fittest, both because that herein we remember the sufferings of Christ for our sins, which is the strongest and most prevailing motive that may be to make us hate sin, and with tears of repentant sorrow to bewail it; as also for that after this meditation of the sufferings of Christ, and conforming of ourselves unto them, his joyful Resurrection for our justification doth immediately present itself unto us in the days ensuing, in the solemnities whereof men were wont with great devotion to approach the Lords Table, and they which were not yet baptised were by Baptism admitted into the Church. Thus than it was not without great consideration, that men made choice of this time wherein to recount all their negligences, sins, and transgressions, and to prepare themselves by this solemn act of fasting, both for the better performance of their own duties in those following days of joyful solemnity, as also to obtain at the hands of God the gracious acceptance of those whom they offered unto him to be entered into his holy Covenant; it being the use and manner of the Primitive Church, never to present any unto Baptism, unless it were in case of danger and necessity, but only in the Feasts of Easter and Whitsuntide. Which being the reasons moving them to institute a set and solemn time of fasting, and to appoint it at this time of the year rather than another; they had an eye, as for the limitation of the number of days to our Saviour's fast of forty days, in the dedicating of the new Covenant; not as precisely tied to that time at all by the intent and purpose of the Lords example, but rather that by keeping the same number of days, we may the better keep in remembrance his fasting and humiliation for the sake of man, and thereby learn the better to express our duty and affections to him. Some other reasons are alleged for this yearly fast, of which some are Political 
(b) Mason of fasting, c. 10. , for the increase of cattle in the Commonwealth, that being as we know full well, the great time of breed; some Physical, for qualifying of the blood by a slender diet of fish, herbs and roots, the blood beginning at that time of the year to increase and boil; and some Spiritual, showing the use and necessity of mortification at that time of the year, in which the blood beginning to be hot and stirring as before was said, is most easily inflamed with the heats of lust. And on these great and weighty reasons as the Church did institute, and all the States of Christendom confirm the strict keeping of it: so hath it hitherto been retained in this Church of England, as far as the condition of the times would bear: in which there is a solemn and set form of service for the first day of Lent, which the Ancients called by the name of Caput jejunii, as also for every Sunday of it, and for each several day of the last week of it, (the holy week, as commonly our Fathers called it) and abstinence from flesh enjoined from the first day thereof till the very last, according to the usage of the purest times; and all this countenanced and confirmed by as good authority as the Laws and Statutes of the Realm can give unto it. Which holy time, had it been as carefully and conscionably observed by all sorts of people, as it was prudently and piously ordained at first; we had no doubt escaped many of those grievous plagues, with which the Lord of late hath scourged us, and even consumed us unto nothing by our own licentiousness.  
But to proceed to the third general point contained in the story of the Lords temptation, in which there is a doubt as before was said, touching the very moment and point of time, which the old Tempter took to give the onset; occasioned by the different narrations of the three Evangelists: that is to say, whether the Devil tempted him all those forty days, and then gave him over; or that he did not trouble him, and begin the business, until the forty days were passed, and his fast was ended. St. Matthews words do seem to intimate, nay to say expressly, that the Tempter did not come unto him till his fast was ended, and that afterwards he was an hungered: and this more literally agrees with the particulars of the following story. But on the other side it is said in Luke, that he was led into the Wilderness, being forty days tempted by the Devil, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as the Greek text reads it: and then how could the Devil set him upon one of the Pinnacles of the Temple if he were all the time of his Temptation within the bowels of that Desert? For resolution of which point 
(c) Euseb. demonstr. Evang. l. 3. c. 2.  Eusebius and St. Cyril two Greek Fathers, though they keep the words, yet they do point them otherwise then we read them now in our printed copies; referring the forty days 
(d) Cyril. de fide recta ad Regin. & de sacerdotio. lib. 2.  which are there spoken of not to his being tempted of the Devil, but to his being in the Wilderness. And then the reading will be thus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. that is to say, And he was led into the Wilderness forty days, being tempted of the Devil, etc. And so it seems it stood in those ancient copies, which were consulted by the Author of the Vulgar Latin, whosoever he was; in which we read, Et agebatur in Spiritu in deserto diebus quadraginta, & tentatur a Diabolo. Which reading if it be allowed of, as I see no reason but it may, than the doubt is ended, and the appearing difference fairly reconciled. Otherwise we may say, and no doubt, most safely, that he was tempted by the Devil all those forty days, as is said by Luke, and after they were ended also, as we find in Matthew: that is to say, as Euthymius 
(e) Euthym. Zigubon. in Mat. cap. 4.  very rightly noteth, the Devil tempted him in those days, (the said forty days) as it were a far off, by sleep, sloth, heaviness, and the like, but after he knew him once to be hungry, than he set upon him (prope & manifest, as the Author hath it) more visibly, and hand to hand, namely in those three great temptations which the story mentioneth. So then, the nick and point of time in which the Devil did apply himself most closely to the work intended, was cum esuriret, when he began to be an hungry. As long as our Redeemer kept himself unto prayer and fasting, the Devil either did not trouble him, or it was either with such trivial and light temptations as made no impression, and neither interrupted him in his holy course, nor caused him to intermit the business he was then upon, by making any necessary replies to his lewd suggestions. But when he began to be an hungry, when his mind seemed to be upon his belly (if I may so say) then did the Devil think it was time to work him. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as it was notably well observed by Chrysostom 
(f) Chrysost. in cap. 4. Mat.  to this very purpose. So excellent is the force and efficacy of an holy fast, that it keeps the Devil at a distance.  
This difficulty thus passed over, we shall next look on the particular temptations which those Gospels speak of. In which it is to be observed, that whereas St. john makes mention of three kinds of lust, which mightily prevail on the affections of us mortal men 
(g) 1 Joh. 2.16. , viz. the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life: the Devil tempted CHRIST in all, and in all was vanquished. He tempted him in the first place with the lust of the flesh, when he found that after such and so long a fast, he began to be hungry, and was reduced to such extremities as to be forced to seek his bread even in desolate places: and said unto him, if that thou be'st the Son of God, as the late voice from heaven did seem to signify, command that these stones be made bread to appease thy hunger, and satisfy that natural necessity which is now upon thee. An opportunity well taken, and as strongly followed, had it been answered with success. For commonly when men are in distress and want, they are then most apt either to distrust the Lord their God as if he left them to themselves without hope of relief; or else to use unlawful means to relieve themselves, which was the point the Devil thought to bring him to by this first temptation. But when he failed of this design, he pressed him in the next place with the lust of the eye, taking him up upon an exceeding high mountain, showing him all the Kingdoms of the World, and the glories of them 
(i) Matth. 4.8. ; and offering to bestow them all upon him, if he would only yield so far as to fall down and worship him. Impudent wretch, thou worst of all wicked spirits, saith Ignatius 
(k) Ignat. Epist. ad Philip. , how was it that thou didst not fear, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to utter such a saucy voice to the Lord of all things? And yet a far more impudent braggart, to make an offer of those things which he had no power of, the Kingdoms of the earth, and the glories of them being holden of no other Lord, than the Lord our God. And here it is to be observed, that whereas in the former onset which only did relate unto Christ himself, he only did reply upon him with a Scriptum est; in this, wherein the glory of his heavenly Father was concerned so highly, he adds an Apage, or rebuke, Get thee hence thou Satan. So that the Devil failing at the two first weapons, betakes himself unto the last, the pride of life, setting him on a pinnacle of the holy Temple, saying, if thou be the Son of God, as credulous men are made believe by the late great miracle of a voice supposed to be from heaven, do somewhat to confirm them in that belief, teque assere coelo 
(l) Ovid. M●tan. l. 1. , somewhat which may indeed make manifest that thou art from heaven, and answerable to the testimony which that voice gave of thee: and a more sure and easy trial thou canst never meet with then by casting thyself down from hence, knowing so well how all the Angels are at hand to attend upon thee, and carry thee upon their wings that thou take no harm. This was the Devils last attempt, and he failed in this too; our Saviour keeping still to his old ward, and beating off all his blows with a Scriptum est: to teach us that the Word of God is the best assurance we can have to rest ourselves upon in the day of Temptation; and that there is no readier way to quench the fiery darts of Satan, then to be always furnished with the waters of life. This done, the Devil finding him impregnable, and that he did but lose his labour in those vain assaults, gives him over presently; He left him to himself, as St. Matthews 
(m) Mat. 4.11.  tells us, and thereby made that good in fact which is recorded of him by St. james the Apostle 
(n) Jam. 4.7. , Resist the Devil and he will fly from you. And yet he left him so as to come again; He departed from him for a season 
(o) Luk. 4 13. , as St. Luke informs us; and he that goes away for a season only, hath animum revertendi, a purpose of returning when he sees occasion; and when he meets with those occasions, we shall find him at it.  
In the mean time, there are some doubts to be resolved touching these temptations, which we will first remove and then pass forwards. For first a question may be made, how the Devil could so suddenly take our Saviour up, and set him on a pinnacle of the holy Temple, being a place so remote from the heart of the Wilderness. But the answer to this doubt is easy, would there were no worse. Read we not how a good Angel laid hold on Habacuc 
(p) Dan. 14.33. , and took him by the hair of the head, and carried him with his dinner in a moment of time from the land of jewrie unto Babylon. And then why may we not conceive but that the Devil, though an evil Angel (yet an Angel) might take up Christ into the air, and carry him to the top of the Temple, and arrest him there? especially our Saviour making no resistance, but rather giving way unto it, and perhaps facilitating the attempt. For that the Devil could do nothing against him, without, much less against his will, is a truth past questioning. But then there is a greater difficulty occurring in the story of the second temptation; where it is said (which seems impossible to be comprehended, that having taken Christ unto the top of the mountain, he showed him all the Kingdoms of the world, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith St. Luke, in a moment of time 
(q) Luk. 4.5. . For resolution of which doubt we must first premise, that those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which we render in the English, in a moment of time, are a Proverbial kind of speech, as Erasmus noteth 
(r) Erasm. in cap. 4. Luc. , by which the Grecians use to signify a short space of time: as where Plutarch saith, 
(s) Plutarch. de liberis educand.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, our whole life is but a short time, and yet far longer than a moment. Agreeably whereto the Translator of the Syriack doth thus read the words, (which Translation is of great and approved Antiquity). He, i. e. Satan, showed him all the Kingdoms in a very small time. And this premised, the doubt may easily be resolved by those two answers, or by which of them the Reader pleaseth. Some think that Satan gave him not a particular inspection of every place, but a general direction to the coasts and parts of the earth where those Kingdoms lay, the rest being supplied by speech and not by sight; and of this mind is he that made the Expositions on St. Matthew ascribed to S Chrysostom. Satan (saith he) did not so show those Kingdoms unto Christ, that he saw the very Kingdoms themselves, or the Cities, people, gold, and silver in them, but the parts of the earth in which every Kingdom and the chief City of it stood 
(t) Homil. 5. in cap. 4. Matth. . And then it followeth (to the same purpose and effect which before we spoke of). For Satan might most directly point with his finger unto every place, and then relate in words express the state and glories of each several Kingdom. With whom agreeth Euthymius Zigabenus amongst the Ancients 
(u) Euthym. Zig. in. cap. 4. Matth. , and Musculus a man of no mean learning amongst later Writers. Others conceive that as the Devil can transform himself into an Angel of light, so he is able also to make spectres, or false shows of any thing, (when he is suffered so to do by Almighty God) to deceive men's eyes: as the Magicians of Egypt turned their rods into Serpents, and changed the rivers into blood, and brought frogs upon the land of Egypt. Experience of all Ages doth confirm this truth. And therefore it may be believed to be no hard thing for him, to frame the appearances of Kingdoms and Cities, and show the similitudes of them from every part of the earth. And to this Calvin doth incline, though very modestly he leaveth every man to his own opinion 
(x) In Harmon. Evangel. . A most learned Prelate of our own likes a third way better 
(y) B. Bilson in his survey p. 309.310. , and thinks that Satan might show, and Christ might see all those places themselves, with all the pomps and glories of them, for that Satan being an Angel had another manner of sight, even in the body which he assumed, than we mortals have; and Christ when it pleased him, could see both what and whither he would, notwithstanding all impediments which were interjected, as appeareth by his own words unto Nathaniel, (for which Nathaniel did acknowledge him for the Son of God) Before Philip called thee, when thou wert under the figtree, I saw thee 
(a) Joh. 1.48. . In such variety of Answers, each of them being satisfactory to the doubt proposed, and all agreeable to the analogy or rule of faith, I leave the Reader to his own choice, and to rely on that which he thinks most probable.  
And now to draw unto an end of that part of our Saviour's sufferings, which consisted in diversity of strong temptations; although the Devil left him for a season as before was said, yet he resolved within himself not to give him over; but to make use of other means, and try other ways, for the effecting of his enterprise. And to this end he seeks to tempt him to ambition, by offering him the crown of his own Country, in the way of a popular election, working upon the common people to come and take him by force and to make him King 
(b) Joh. 6.15. . He tempts him also to vain glory, by the shouts and acclamations of the Vulgar, Nec vox hominem senate 
(c) Virg. Aen. 1. , Never man spoke as this man speaketh. He tempts him also to self-love, to have a greater care of his own preservation then of doing the will of him that sent him: and therein he makes use of Peter one of Christ's dom●stick●, his principal Secretary as it were, one of counsel with him. And Peter in pursuance of the dangerous drift, took him aside, advised him to have more care of himself then so, Let this be far from thee O Lord 
(e) Ma.. 16.22. , and was rejected for it in the self same terms, Get behind me Satan, wherewith the very Devil was repulsed before. Finally during the whole time of his earthly pilgrimage, of his conversing in our flesh, the Devil never failed in his endeavours, sometimes himself, and sometimes by the means of others, either by flatteries or by contumelies to prevail upon him; though always to his own loss, and to the greater ruin of that Kingdom of darkness, which he had founded on this earth. And these we reckon for the first part of those inward sufferings which our Redeemer did endure under Pontius Pilate: not by exciting in his heart any evil motions, in which respect we men are said most commonly to be tempted inwardly; but by presenting to his senses such continual objects, as he conceived most like to work on the inward Man. For otherwise it cannot be affirmed of CHRIST that he was tempted inwardly, that is to say, by any motions rising from within, without manifest Blasphemy. And to this, all sound Orthodox Christians have agreed unanimously. Thus Gregory amongst the Latins 
(f) Gregor. in Evang. hom. 16. , Omnis illa tentatio Diabolica foris non intus; all that temptation of the Devil was not inward but outward. And thus Theophylact for the Greeks 
(g) Theop. in c. 4. Mat. , The Devil, said he, appeared to Christ in some visible shape, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; for thoughts (that is to say, any thoughts of sin) Christ admitted not. The Lord forbid we should conceive such a wicked fancy. Thus Calvin finally for the latter writers 
(h) Calv. in Harm. Evang. , It is, saith he, no error or absurdity to think that CHRIST should be tempted of the Devil, modo ne intus, hoc est in ment et anima quicquam putemus passum fuisse, so that we do not hold that he suffered any thing in his mind or soul. So to make the thoughts and cogitations of the heart of Christ to be inwardly moved with pride, presumption, infidelity, and Idolatry, as some men have done 
(i) Of whom see B. Bilson in his Survey. p. 305, 310, 311 , the better to find out the pains of hell in our Saviour's soul; were to be guilty of their sin, who to that end have vented most blasphemous figments and pernicious impostures, to the seducing of the simple, the hurt of their own souls, and the dishonour of Christ. But of this we shall speak more at large in the following Article, of Christ's descending into hell: for the misconstruing of which Article, or rather for the total expurgation of it, it was first invented. We now proceed to those afflictions which assaulted inwardly, which wrought upon his soul only, on the inward man; and then to those which were inflicted also upon his Body, so far forth as they did precede his Crucifixion, which shall come after by itself.   

CHAP. VI Of the afflictions which our Saviour suffered both in his soul and body under Pontius Pilate, in the great work of man's Redemption.  
THat CHRIST our Saviour was tempted in all things 
(a) Heb. 4.15. , as we are, yet without sin, (that is to say, without the least internal motion and provocation of the heart to sin) as we are not; hath been abundantly discovered in the former Chapter. We now proceed to those afflictions which he suffered for us in his mind or soul, those griefs of heart and anguish of the Spirit which did fall upon him, in reference to the great work of man's redemption; for as for those which seized upon him out of particular affections, as his groaning in the Spirit over the grave of his dead friend Lazarus 
(b) Joh. 11.33. , or the lamenting those calamities which he foresaw would shortly fall on his native Country; they do not come within the compass of this disquisition. And these we purpose to examine with the greater industry, because there is a sort of men, as before I said, that to elude the true and genuine meaning of Christ's descent into hell, have fancied to themselves and proclaimed to others, that they have found the pains of hell in our Saviour's soul; and that there was no other descent of Christ into hell than the extremity of those hellish and most dismal pains, which he suffered in his humane soul here upon the earth. And first to take those texts in, order in which those sorrows and afflictions are most plainly met with, in the first place we find him in the garden of Gethsemane, the place designed for the great combat betwixt him and Satan: where taking with him Peter, and the two sons of Zebedee, it is said 
(c) Mat. 26.37. , that he began to be sorrowful, and very heavy; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as the Greek text hath it. St. Mark 
(d) Mar. 14.33.  with the alteration of one word only doth deliver it thus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he began to be sore amazed and very heavy; coepit contristrari & verementer angi, saith the translator of the Syriack. This was it seemeth with him the beginning of sorrows, for it is said that he began to be sorrowful and sore amazed: which though it was a sad beginning, yet it was mastered in the end. For though he began to be afraid and sore amazed upon the apprehension of those bitter pangs of death which he was to struggle with: yet he no further did submit to this passion of fear and this discomfiture of amazement, then to express the natural horror which he had of that deadly cup whereof he was presently to drink; not suffering it to possess him wholly, or to bear dominion over him, or to work in him any such corruptions, as we frail men are subject to in the like extremities. And this is that and only that which is meant by Origen 
(e) Origen in Mat. tract. 35. , where he affirmeth, Coepit pavere vel tristari, nihil amplius tristitiae vel pavoris patience, nisi principium tantum. No such amazement, no such sorrow as might make him lose either speech, or sense, or memory, as some men imagine; much less to pray he knew not what 
(f) B. bilson's Survey. p. 440, 477. , but least of all to pray expressly against the known will of his heavenly Father. Nor will the words in the Original admit any such meaning. For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Scripture signifies no such amazement, as takes away men's senses from them: which appears evidently in this, that when he descended from the mountain where he was transfigured, the people which saw him were amazed (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, saith the text) 
(g) Mar. 9.15.  and yet they came unto him, and saluted him, as the Gospel tells us. So when they saw him cast out Devils by his word alone, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they were all amazed 
(h) Mark. 1.27. , and yet they asked of one another what strange thing that was: and when the two Apostles had healed the poor old cripple at Solomon's porch, the people were amazed 
(i) Act. 3.12. , (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) and yet flocked all unto the place to behold the miracle. And for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, it signifieth no such heaviness in the book of God, as draweth with it all or any of those distractions above remembered: St. Paul affirming of Epaphroditus, that he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(k) Phil. 2.26.  exceeding pensive, because the Philipians who most dearly loved him had heard he was sick, and that he knew not how to comfort them with the joyful news of his recovery. Sorrow, and grief, and anguish, and disconsolation, our Saviour did begin to feel, there's no doubt of that: though not in such a high degree as to make him fall into those extremities of passion, as neither to know what he did, nor for what he prayed. He that could come to his Disciples in the midst of his anguish, and reprove them for their sloth and sleepiness, had neither lost the use of his speech nor senses. And if his prayers were full of faith, as no doubt they were 
(l) Heb. 7.5. , for the Scriptures say that he was heard, in that he prayed for, (which could not be without a perfect measure of faith) assuredly, however he was heavily oppressed under the burden of afflictions, he knew full well both what he prayed for, and to whom.  
But this was only the beginning of his sorrows, as before was said. It followeth in the text both in Matthew and Mark, My soul is exceeding sorrowful even unto the death: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, my soul is compassed round with sorrows, such as do seem to threaten me with no less than death, and yet no way to scape them, as in both Evangelists. And certainly it stood with reason that it should be so. For as an eminent Prelate of our own 
(m) B. bilson's Survey. p. 387.  doth observe right well, The whole work and weight of our Redemption, was now before Christ's eyes and apprehension, in a more exact and lively manner (he now appearing before the judgement seat of God) than we in this body can discern. For as all things needful shall be present and patent to us when we are brought to God's tribunal, so Christ presenting himself before the judgement of God, to the end that man might be redeemed by the ransom which he was to pay for him, and Satan ejected from prevailing against his members by his mediation, did fully and perfectly behold the detestation which God had conceived against our sins, and the power of his wrath provoked by our defection and rebellion; as also the dreadful vengeance prepared and ordained for sin, and our dull and careless contempt of our own misery, together with the watchfulness and eagerness of the common adversary, the brunt and burden of all which he was to bear, and to avert them from us by by that satis ●action which the justice of God should then require at his hands, as a just price and full recompense for the sins of men. The due consideration and intuition whereof being in Christ more clear than we can conceive, might worthily make the manhood of Christ both to fear and tremble, and in his prayers to God to stir and inflame all the powers and parts both of soul and body (as far as man's nature and spirit were able) with all submission and deprecation possible to pour forth themselves before his God. Here was full cause undoubtedly to make him sorrowful, and sorrowful unto the death. How could it otherwise be conceived when the just and full reward of our iniquities was thus presented to his sight, when he beheld the greatness and the justness of God's wrath against it; and therewithal considered within himself how dear the price must be and how sharp the pain which should free us of it? And on the other side considered how precious his own person was, how infinite his obedience, how pure his life; and yet how that most precious life must be taken from him, that by one death, and that death only of the body, he might deliver us from the death both of body and soul. So then his soul was ●ull of sorrow, there was good cause for it; but not oppressed with any pains, much less tormented and inflanted with the pains of hell, as some would fain gather from the text; for neither tristitia in Latin, nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek, either amongst divine or humane writers, signify any such impression of pain and torment, but an affection only which afflicts the mind, rising upon the apprehension of some evil either past or instant, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek amongst the choicest humanitians, is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(n) Tusculan. quaest. l. 4. , which Cicero translates opinio recens mali praesentis, a fresh opinion of present or impendent evil. And Austin telleth us for the Latins 
(o) In Psal. 42. , that grief and anguish when it is in the soul is called tristitia, that is, sorrow; but when 'tis in the body, then 'tis molestia, pain or trouble. Thus is the word taken also in the holy Scripture, where St. Paul saith, I would not come again unto you, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in sorrow or heaviness 
(o) 2 Cor. 2. , for fear he should have sorrow of them, of whom he did expect to be received with joy: and where it is affirmed of the rest of the servants when they perceived how cruelly their fellow-servant which was pardoned so great a sum, dealt with one of his debtors, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(p) Mat. 18.31. , they were very sorry. And certainly they might be very sorry on so sad an accident, out of a fellow-feeling of their Brother's misery, we have no reason to conceive them to be full of pain.  
Hitherto we have met with such griefs and sorrows in our Saviour, as never man endured before; but yet they prove not to be such as either did confound all the powers of his soul, or astonish all the senses of his body 
(q) B. Bilson p. 480, 481.  or brought him into such amazement that he considered neither what he said or did. Some have endeavoured to infer this as before was noted, out of the texts and words foregoing, but with ill success: and therefore they are fallen at last on an other Scripture, which they think makes for them. How is my soul troubled 
(r) Joh. 12.27. , saith our Saviour, and what shall I say? Father save me from this hour, but for this cause came I unto this hour. Here they observe a contrariety or contradiction in our Saviour's words, which could not possibly proceed but from a soul distracted and a mind confounded: and what could work so strange and sensible a confusion in him, but the pains of hell which were within him. But whatsoever they observe, the most eminent men for parts and learning in the times before them, could see no such matter. Erasmus in his Paraphrases gives this gloss upon them 
(s) Erasm. et Bulling. in locum. , which Bullinger a learned Protestant writer doth extol most highly, and calleth an excellent explication. I find my soul troubled for the day of my death approaching; and what shall I say? For the love of mine own life shall I neglect the life of the world? By no means; I will apply myself to the will of my Father. Man's weakness troubled with the fear of death may say unto him, Father if it be possible save me from this hour, from this danger of death which is now so near me. But love desirous of man's salvation shall presently add, Nay rather if it be expedient, let death which is desired, come; for as much as wittingly and willingly by the leading of the Spirit, I have offered myself unto the same. And thus Theophylact 
(t) Theop. in 12. Joh. , following the constant current of the former writers; For this cause came I unto this hour, that I might suffer death for all; by which he very plainly tells us, that though we be troubled and perplxed at it, we must not fly death for the truth. For I (saith Christ) am troubled as you see being a true and innocent man, and cannot but permit man's nature to show itself: yet do I not say unto my Father that he should save me from this hour; but that he glorify his name. Finally, thus St. Chrysostom for the ancient Fathers (out of whose garden Theophylact collected his best flowers) Therefore came I unto this hour, i. e. as if the Lord had said 
(u) Chry. Hom. 66. in. Joh. , (in terms more particular and express) though we be moved and troubled, yet we flee not death, for this I say not as my resolution, Father deliver me from this hour, but Father glorify thy name. So that these words of Christ being thus expounded according to the true intent and full meaning of them, import not such a contrariety or contradiction as these dreamers fancy; but only do import a consultation and deliberation held within himself; though such indeed as might and did proceed from a troubled soul. And therefore Epiphanius notes exceeding well, that our Redeemer spoke these words 
(u) Epiphan. l. 2. haeres. 69.  in the way of preparation or dubitation, as being scarce thoroughly resolved what he had to do. For howsoever the inclination of nature induced him to avoid death as much as might be, in this debating with himself what was best to be done: yet he did presently reject and repel those inclinations, saying, for this cause came I unto this hour; and absolutely resigned them in the words next follwing, Father glorify thy name.  
But it is time I leave these triflers, and return back into the garden of Bethsemane, where I left my Saviour, sorrowing and lamenting under the most calamitous burden of our sins and miseries: whom I find first kneeling on his knees 
(y) Luk. 22.41. , but after prostrate on the ground 
(x) Mark. 14.35. , on his very face 
(a) Mat. 26.39. , and calling earnestly and passionately on the Lord his God, and saying, Father, if it be possible let this cup pass from me. It seems God looked upon him now, or on the sins of man which were laid upon him, with a wrathful countenance, holding his lightnings in his hands, and all the vials of his anger to be poured upon him. He had not else broke out into these expressions, which were indeed the true effects and signs of a soul astonished. And yet not so astonished neither as some men would have him, who make him pray in this confusion and astonishment against Gods known will 
(b) B. Bilson p. 397. : which is an irreligious and most dangerous dotage. For doth not CHRIST submit immediately to his father's will? doth he not say in terms express, not my will but thy will be done? And call you this a praying against Gods known will? How much more orthodoxly is the point resolved by Chrysostom 
(c) Apud Theod. dial. 3. , where we read as followeth; If this were spoke, saith he, of Christ's divinity, than were it a contradiction indeed, and many absurdities would thence follow; but if it were spoken of the flesh, than was there good reason for these words, and nothing in them to be blamed. And this the Father presseth in the following words, For (saith he) that the flesh would not willingly die, is not a thing to be condemned, because proper to nature; the properties whereof he showed in himself, yet without sin, and that very abundantly, thereby to stop the mouths of Heretics. When then he saith, If it be possible let this cup pass from me, and not as I will but as thou wilt, he declareth nothing else, but that he was invested with true real flesh, which feared the inevitable stroke of death, that showing the infirmity thereof he might confirm the truth of his humane nature, yet sometimes covered those fears and other infirmities (from being visibly discerned) because he was not a bare man. Here than we see an easy way to salve that contrariety to the known will of God, imputed by these men to our Saviour's prayer: which yet the Schoolmen have expressed in a clearer and more significant manner 
(d) Feild of the Church. l. 5.18. . There was say they, a double apprehension of reason in Christ, the one termed the superior, which looketh into things with all incident circumstances; the other the inferior, which presenteth to the mind some circumstances, but not all. Then they declare that in Christ every faculty, power and part was suffered (notwithstanding the perfection found in some other) to do that which properly pertained to it. And thereupon infer that thence it is easy to discern how it came to pass, that he should desire and pray for that which he knew would never be granted, as namely that the Cup of death might pass from him. For the sense (say they) of nature and inferior reason presented death and the ignominy of the Cross unto him as they were evil in themselves, without any consideration of the good to follow, and so caused a desire to decline them, which he expresseth in that prayer. But superior reason considering them with all the circumstances, and knowing God's resolution to be such that the world by that means should be saved, and by no other means whatsoever, persuaded to a willing acceptance of them: so that between these desires and resolutions there was a diversity but no contrariety, a subordination but no repugnance. There was no contrariety, because they were not in respect of the same circumstances; for death as death is to be avoided: neither did the superior reason ever dislike this judgement of the inferior faculties, but showed further and higher considerations, whereon it was to be accepted and embraced. And there was no repugnance nor resistance, because the one yielded to the other. For even as a man that is sick, considering the potion of the Physician to be unpleasant to his taste, declines it whiles he stays within the bounds and confines of that consideration; but when he is showed by the Physician the happy operation of it, and the good that is in it, doth receive it willingly, in that it is beneficial to him in the way of his health: So CHRIST considering death, as in itself it is evil, and contrary to the nature of all mankind, shunned and declined it whilst he stayed within the bounds of that consideration; and yet did joyfully accept it as the only means of man's salvation, embracing what he had refused, and refusing what he had embraced. Again, There is a thing (saith Hugo de Sancto Victore) which is bonum in se, good in itself, and the good of every other thing: there are somethings good in themselves, and yet good but to certain purposes only; and some there are which being evil in themselves, are to some purposes good. Of these the two first sorts are to be desired simply and absolutely for themselves; the other in respect only unto certain ends. And of this kind (saith he) was the death of the Cross, with all the woeful torments concurring with it: which simply Christ shunned and declined, but respectively to the end proposed, did embrace it cheerfully. So far, and to this purpose and effect, the said Reverend and Learned Doctor.  
This being declared, and the point thus stated by the Schoolmen, we will next see how this agreeth with the sense of all the ancient and orthodox writers, who have delivered us their conceptions of this prayer of Christ's. And first saith Origen 
(i) Origen in Mat. Tract. 35. , CHRIST taking to him the nature of man's flesh retained all the properties thereof, according to which he prayed in this place that the cup might pass from him. It is the property of every faithful man to be unwilling to suffer any pain, especially that tendeth unto death, because he is a man, and hath flesh about him; but if God so will, then to be content even against that will of his own, because he is faithful. There is also another exposition of this place, which is this, If it be possible that all these good things may come to effect without my passion, which otherwise shall come by my death, then let this passion pass from me, but not otherwise. And Athanasius thus 
(k) Athan. Orati. 4. Contr. Arian. , As by death Christ abolished death, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and all humane miseries by suffering them as a man; so by his fear he took away our fear, and made men no longer to fear death. But Cyril of Alexandria next 
(l) Cyr. Thesaur. l. 10. c. 3. , Quando formidasse mortem videtur, ut homo dicebat, etc. When Christ seemed to fear death he said as a man, Father let this cup pass from me; for though as a man he abhorred death, yet as a man he refused not to perform the will of his Father, and of himself being the word of God. Then Beda thus 
(m) Beda in 14. cap. Mark. , agreeably to the sense of his Predecessors; if death may die without my death in the flesh, let this cup pass from me; but because this will not otherwise be, thy will be done, not mine. Then Damascen 
(n) Damasc. Orthod. fid. l. 3. c. 18. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, These words, saith he, proceeded from a natural fear, for as a man CHRIST would have had the cup to pass. Next him Euthymius Zigabenus thus 
(o) Euth. Zig. in Mat. 26. , As a man Christ said, if it be possible, i. e. so far as it is possible: and in saying, yet not as I will but as thou wilt, he teacheth that we must follow the will of God though nature reclaim. And in the close of all Theophylact 
(p) Theop. in 26. Mat. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, it is incident to the nature of man to fear death; for death entered besides (or against) nature, and therefore nature flieth death. And in another place 
(q) Id. in Luk. 22. , The common fear of man's nature Christ cured, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, consuming it in himself, and making it obedient to the will of God. In which concurrent testimonies of the ancient writers, we have not only the full grounds of that distinction of the Schoolmen touching the superior and inferior Reason, and the several and adequate acts of each; but also of the observation of Hugo de Sancto Victore, and of those several respects and reasons in which Christ may be said both to decline death, and to embrace it. But being there is so much speech amongst them of a natural fears, or the fears incident to nature, we will once more repair unto the Schoolmen, and inquire of them, both what his natural fear was, and in what respect it was he feared, as also how this fear of his may be reconciled both with the will of God and his knowledge of it. First then they say 
(r) Feild of the Church. l. 5. c. 18  that natural fear ariseth in these three respects, that is to say, first in respect of things that cannot be avoided neither by resistance and encounter, nor by flying from them; secondly, in respect of such things as may be escaped or overcome with a kind of uncertainty of event, and danger of the issue; thirdly, in respect of such as may be escaped or overcome without any uncertainty of the event or issue, but not without great conflict and extremity of labour. Then they declare what things they were which Christ did fear, and in what sort he feared them. For first (say they) he feared death, and the stroke of the justice of God his Father sitting on his tribunal or judgement seat to punish the sins of men, for which he stood forth that day to answer; and secondly, he feared also that everlasting destruction, which was due to mankind for those sins. And finally, they resolve it thus, that the former of these two he feared as things impossible to be escaped in respect of the resolution and purpose of his heavenly Father, which was, that by his satisfactory death and sufferings, and no other way, man should be ransomed and delivered from the power of Satan: and that he feared the latter, that is to say, declined it as a thing he knew he should escape without all doubt or uncertainty of the event, though not without conflicting with the temptations of the Devil, and the enduring of many bitter and grievous pangs which in that conflict might befall him. Which resolution of the Schoolmen, not only shows the reasons of CHRIST'S natural fear; but adds withal another reason, why he was so amazed and sorrowful; and also why he prayed so long and with so great fervency, that the cup which was prepared for him, might have passed over him.  
And to say truth, it must be somewhat more than the consideration and apprehension of a bodily death, which could so much work upon our Saviour, considering with how much gallantry so many of the primitive Martyrs have defied their torments, and mounted on the scaffold with so clear a confidence as if they had not been to have suffered death, but behold a Triumph. And therefore first it may be said, that besides the natural fear of death which is incident to the Saints of God (however gallantly resolved to contemn the force of it by the assistance and support of the holy Spirit) which he could not avoid; and the avoidable fear of everlasting destruction, which might be for a season presented to him: he was to undergo the whole wrath of God for the sins of mankind. A wrath so infinite and just, so far exceeding the strength and reach of man's nature to endure; that our earthly infirmity to which for our sakes he submitted himself, cannot conceive nor comprehend the greatness of it, nor think upon the power thereof without fear and horror. CHRIST, saith a reverend and learned Prelate of this Church 
(s) B. Bilson. p. 376. , was not only to suffer that which in his Person should be thought sufficient in the righteous judgement of God to appease his anger, and purge our sins, but he was further to see and behold from what he delivered us, even from the wrath to come. For how should the price and force of his death be known unto him, if he were ignorant what dreadful and terrible vengeance was prepared for sin, should he not redeem us? Since therefore he was at this time to bear the burden of our sins in his body, and to have the chastisement of our peace laid upon him, and did withal behold the fierceness of God's wrath against sinful man, how could he choose but fear the effects thereof, and pray against them? For though he were assured that this wrath of God would not proceed against him unto condemnation; yet he knew well that God had infinite means to press and punish humane nature above that which it was able to bear. And therefore he addressed himself to his heavenly Father, being sure that God at his most earnest and fervent prayer would proportion the pain he was to suffer according to the weakness of that flesh which he bore about him, that neither his obedience might be staggered, nor patience overwhelmed and swallowed up in despair. Besides there might be somewhat else in the cup provided for him, than the wrath of God with all the fears and terrors which depend upon it: which might make him so unwilling to taste thereof, so earnestly desirous to decline the same. For many of the Fathers think, that Christ did pray more vehemently to have that cup pass from him, because he saw the jews so eagerly inclined to force it on him; and knew that if he drank thereof, and took it from their murderous and bloody hands, it could not but draw down upon them such most grievous punishments as the dispersing of their nation, and the rejection of them from the Covenant and grace of God. For thus saith Origen 
(t) Orig. in Mat. tract. 35. , for those men then, whom he would not have perish by his passion he said, Father if it be possible let this cup pass from me, that both the world might be saved (which was the principal matter aimed at) and the Jews not perish by his suffering. St. Ambrose thus 
(u) Amb. in Luk. l. 10. c. 22. , Therefore said Christ, take this cup from me, not because the Son of God feared death, but for that he would not have the Jews though wicked to perish, Ne exitialis esset populo Passio sua quae omnibus esset salutaris; lest his passion should be destructive to them, which was to be healthful unto all. Of the same mind is Hierome also 
(x) Hier. in Mat. 26. . Christ said not, let the cup pass from me, but let this cup pass from me, i. e. this cup provided by the Jews, which can have no excuse of ignorance if they put me to death, considering that they have the Law and the Prophets which foretell of me. So that Christ makes not this request as as fearing to suffer, but in mercy to the former people, Sed misericordia prioris populi, ne calicem ab illis propinatum bibat, that he might not drink the cup which was offered by them. Whose judgement in this point is so well approved by venerable Bede 
(y) Beda in 26. Mat.  our Countryman, that he is loath to change the words. And certainly this consideration of those worthies stands on very good reason 
(z) B. Bilson. p. 356▪ 357. , For if he so much pitied the ruin of the City and desolation of their land by the hands of the Romans, that he wept upon the thought thereof; what sorrow and disconsolation shall we think he took to think of the perpertual destruction of so many thousands and their posterities for ever, thorough their own madness in thirsting after his blood? What grief and anguish must it be unto him to foresee the rejection of that people from the favour of God, by their rash and wicked desire to have his blood upon them and upon their children at his arraignment before Pilate? For if Moses and Paul so vehemently grieved at the fall of their Brethren according to the flesh, that for their sakes the one wished to be wiped out of the book of God, the other most sacredly protested the great heaviness and continual anguish which he felt for them in his heart: how much more might it grieve the Saviour of the world, who much exceeded both the other in compassion and mercy, to see himself who came to bless them and to save them, to be the rock and stone of offence that should stumble them and their children, striking them with perpetual blindness, and bruising them with everlasting perdition, through their unbelief?  
But whether this was so or not (as it may be probable) most sure it is that many things concurred together to make up the measure of those sarrowes, fears and terrors, which were then upon him; and against which he prayed so fervently, and with such prostration. Insomuch that having offered up his prayers and supplication to him that was able to save him from death with strong crying and tears 
(a) Heb. 5.7. ; to him who was able had he pleased to take away that cup from him, but howsoever able and willing both to mitigate the sharpness of it and abate the bitterness; the Lord thought fit to send him comfort from above by his heavenly Ministers. And there appeared an Angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him 
(b) Luk. 22.43. ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the Greek, which by the vulgar Latin is translated confortans eum, comforting him▪ by the translator of the Syriack, confirmans eum, strengthening or confirming him, as our last translation. The word in the Original will bear both constructions, both being of especial use in the present business. For if we look upon our Saviour in the midst of his anguish, praying unto the Lord, that if it were possible, that cup might pass from him; the Angel may be thought to be sent unto him with a message of Comfort, touching the mitigation of his sorrows, the speedy end they were to have, and the inestimable benefit that by his sufferings should redound unto all the world: and then it is confortans e●m, as the vulgar Latin. But if we look upon him as resolved to submit himself to his Father's pleasure, (not my will but thy will be done) and patiently to endure whatever he should lay upon him; the Angel may be thought to be sent unto him, to strengthen and confirm him in that resolution: and then it is confirmans eum, as the translator of the Syriack reads it. But which soever of the two it was, certain it is, that the appearance of the Angel had some special end. God doth not use to send about those heavenly messengers, but on businesses of great importance. And though there be no constat in the book of God, what this business was, on which the Angel was sent down by the Lord's appointment, yet we may probably conceive, that it was to give him this assurance that his prayers were heard; whether they tended to the mitigation of his present sorrows, or the accepting of his death and passion, as a full, perfect and sufficient satisfaction for the sins of the world. For the Apostle having told us in the fifth to the Hebrews, that when in the days of his flesh he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears, unto him that was able to save him from death; he addeth in the very next words, that he was heard in that he feared: that is to say, the prayers and supplications which he made to God were not ineffectual, but he obtained that of the Lord for which he prayed so earnesly and devoutly to him, in regard that his said prayers proceeded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, saith the text, from a godly and religious fear, such as the School men call by the name of the fear of reverence. Now that the matter of these prayers might be in reference to his offering of himself for the good of mankind, many of the Fathers say expressly. St. Paul here saith (as Ambrose writeth) that Christ offered prayers and supplications 
(c) Ambros. in Heb. 5. , non timore mortis, sed nostrae causa salutis, not so much for the fear of death, as for man's salvation; and thereupon Paul saith in another place, that the blood of Christ cried better things for us, than the blood of Abel; so saith Primasius 
(d) Primasius in Heb. 5. , Totum quicquid egit Christus in carne, etc. All that Christ did in the flesh were prayers and supplications for the sins of mankind; and the shedding of his blood was a strong cry, in which he was heard of God his Father in regard of his reverence, i. e. for his voluntary obedience and most perfect charity. The like saith Haymo on the text 
(e) Haymo ibid. , a writer of the middle times, but of very good worth, who keeps himself in the particular to the words of Primasius. But above all Sedulius comes most home to the point in hand, a writer of good credit under Theodosius the 2. Ann. 430. or thereabouts. Christ, saith he, prayed with tears] not shed for fear of death, but for our salvation; and was heard] of God the Father, when the Angel did comfort him; for his reverence] either his with his Father, or else his Fathers towards him. So that if either the mitigation of those fears and terrors which were then upon him, or the acceptance of his death in ransom for the sins of the world, were any part of those prayers which he made in the Garden, as in all likelihood they were: it could not but be most comfortable news unto him that his prayers were granted, and the Angel a most welcome messenger by whom such comfortable news was sent. And this we may the rather think to be the message which the Angel brought, in regard that after this we find no more mention of those fears and sorrows which formerly had seized upon him; but that he cheerfully prepared himself for the stroke of death, and called up his Disciples to go forth to meet it. So careful was his heavenly Father of his dearest Son, as not to hold him in suspense; but to impart unto him upon all occasions how grateful his obedience was, how infinitely he was pleased with that zeal, constancy, which he had manifested in his greatest and most fiery trials. In which regard no sooner had he driven away the Devil, in that great temptation which at first he suffered in the Wilderness, but behold the Angels came and ministered unto him 
(f) Mat 4.11. ; as St. Matthew telleth us. And here, no sooner had he overcome the difficulties which flesh and blood and humane frailty had proposed unto him; and called upon the Lord for strength to go through with so great a work, and for the acceptation of that offering he was then to make: but strait an Angel came from Heaven, to strengthen him in his sufferings, and comfort him in his afflictions. No mention after this of those fears and sorrows which formerly had seized upon him; and of the which he had complained so sensibly unto his Disciples.  
But then perhaps it will be said, If on the coming of the Angel he received such comforts, what then could bring him to that Agony which the Gospel speaks of, and speaks of in the very next words to those of the appearance of the holy Angel: an agony so sharp and piercing, that his sweat was as it were great drops of blood 
(g) Luk. 22.44. ? I know indeed, that many do impute this Agony to that extremity of grief which our Saviour suffered, and others to those hellish and infernal torments which they conceive (according to the new devise) to have been within him; and that the bloody sweat which the Scriptures speak of, was an effect or consequent of those griefs and torments. But on a further search into the business we shall find it otherwise: the Agony into which he fell proceeding not from the extremity of pain or sorrow, but from a greater vehemency in prayer. (And being in an agony saith the Text▪ he prayed more earnestly,) in which he was so zealously inflamed against sin and Satan, that he poured forth not only the strength of his soul, but the very spirits of his body. For though the word Agony be sometimes improperly taken for fear, yet properly it is affirmed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of him that is ready to descend to any combat or conflict, as 
(h) Etymolog. Magnum ex Orion.  Orion a most ancient Grecian observeth: in which regard Damascen gives this exposition of the word, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, standing in doubt, or fearing lest we fail in our undertake, we are said to be agonized, or to be in an agony. And hereto Aristotle that great and wise Philosopher agreeth also, where he showeth not only that an agony may be where there is no fear, as when we attempt things honest and commendable, though difficult to be attained, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(i) Aristot. Rhetor. l. 1. c. 9 , for which men strive and are agonized without fear: but also that sweeting in an agony proceeds not from fear, but rather from zeal and indignation. An agony saith he is not the passing of the natural heat from the higher parts of the body to the lower, as in fear; but rather an increase of heat, as in anger and indignation: and he that is in an agony is not troubled with fear or cold 
(k) Id. in Problem. sect. 2. qu. 26. , (which crosseth ex diametro this new devise) but with expectation of the event. So that an agony (to speak properly) inferreth neither fainting fear nor deadly pain, as some misconceive it, but noteth a contention or intention of body or mind, whereby men labour to perform their desires, and strive against the dangers which may defeat them of and in their enterprise. And for this agony of Christ's, if we compare it with those circumstances which attend the text, we shall plainly see, that it proceeded not from the extremity of grief or sorrow, against both which he had received strength and comfort by the hands of the Angel, but from that fervency of zeal and contention of mind to prevail in that which he desired, and to remove all rubs and difficulties which were set before him. The Devil as we know did attempt our Saviour, at the first entrance on his Ministry, when he was first proclaimed to be the Son of God; though then he had no more quarrel to him, then to find out the truth of that proclamation, whether he were the Son of God or not, which the voice from heaven proclaimed him openly to be. But since that time there had been many bicker between them, in which the Devil always went away with the loss: his Ministers disgraced and their crimes laid open, even in the sight of all the people; his Kingdom in the souls of men in danger to be lost for ever, by the preaching of that Gospel which our Saviour taught; and as a preparative thereunto himself ejected violently out of many of his strongest holds and fortresses, I mean the bodies of those men which he had possessed. And then why may we not conceive that either to revenge himself on his mortal enemy, in a desperate hope to prevail against him, he had now mustered all his forces for another onset, and was resolved to put the whole fortune of his affairs upon the issue of this combat; and by the issue and success thereof (of so great a battle) to decide the title which he pretended and laid claim to in the souls of mankind? Why may not this be thought the conflict, in which our Saviour was engaged, or willingly had engaged himself on the appearance of the Angel; for the success whereof he prayed so earnestly, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as in the Greek, with greater earnestness of mind and fervency of zeal, than he did before? For my part I can see no reason but it might be so. Certain I am that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which signifies a race, a wrestling, or some such solemn public exercise, and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the plural number, denote such things as appertain to those games and exercises. Thus read we in the book of Maccabees, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Cum quinquennalis Agon Tyro celebraretur, i. e. 
(l) Maccab. l. 2. c. 4. v. 18.  when the games of every fifth year were kept at Tyre: and in the first to the Corinthians, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, nam qui in Agone contendit, etc. i. e. Every man that striveth for the mastery, as the English reads it 
(m) 1 Cor. 9.25. . And it is plain to any who is conversant in the Greek, not only that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, doth signify to be solicitous and in anguish, but also to contend or strive about the victory, but also that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (the word here used by the Evangelists) though it doth generally denote a dismaying sorrow, yet is used sometimes to express, Luctantis angustias difficillimas, the straits which Wrestlers are reduced to in those public exercises.  
But whether this conjecture be approved or not (for I leave it arbitrary) there is no question to be made, but that the bloody sweat which the Scripture speaks of, proceeded not from fear but fervency; not from the anguish of his heart, but from that heat of zeal and strong intention of mind which was then upon him. It could not come from fear, that's certain; for fear, as Galen hath observed, doth presently drive the blood and spirits towards their Fountain 
(n) Galen de causis Symptom. l. 2.  and contracteth them together, by cooling the uttermost parts of the body. For on the apprehension of any imminent danger, the blood and spirits which are naturally diffused through all the parts of the body, repair immediately unto the heart as the principal fortress for the strength and preservation of the whole; repercussis spiritibus atque in intimos cordis sinus receptis, as we read in Scaliger 
(o) Scaliger de subtilitate. . So that the blood and spirits being drawn back to the heart, or towards their fountain as Galen saith, as usually they are in the case of fear; it cannot be that any extremity of fear should be the cause of such an unusual kind of sweat, as that which did befall our Saviour: And on the other side, it is no new thing that fervency of zeal, and a vehement contention of the mind, being they heat and thin the blood (and not cool and thicken it, as we are told by Galen that fear doth most commonly) should produce such a strange effect as a bloody sweat. For the Physician (whosoever he was) who writ the Book De utilitate respirationis, amongst Galens works 
(p) Inter opera Galeni. Tom. 7.  doth affirm for certain, Contingere poros ex multo aut fervido spiritu adeo dilatari ut etiam exeat sanguis per eos, fiatque sudor sanguineus, that is to say, it sometimes happeneth that abundant or fervent spirits do so dilate the pores of the body, that blood issueth out by them, and so the sweat may be bloody. Which observation being true (as no doubt it is) we may well think if we look to the order and sequence of the Gospel, that the fervent zeal of our Redeemer extremely heating the whole body, melting the spirits, rarifying the blood, opening the pores, and so colouring and thickening the sweat of Christ, might in most likelihood be the cause of that bloody sweat. Doth not the Gospel say expressly, that being in an Agony (or dangerous and dreadful conflict) he prayed more earnestly 
(q) Luk. 22 44. , and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground? and was not then that bloody sweat a natural and proper effect of that fervency and zeal of prayer, of which it is made a consequent in the holy Gospel? Certain I am that Zuinglius one of the first men that laboured in the present Reformation of the Church did conceive it so: 
(r) Zuinglius in histor. Passi●.  Non lacrymas modo oculis sed & sanguinis guttas e corpore exprimit seria & devota oratio, etc. Serious and fervent prayer (saith he) doth not only draw tears from the eyes, but a bloody sweat also from the body, as we see in Christ's agony. And doth not Bernard say to the same effect 
(s) Bern. in ramis Psal. ser. 3 , that Christ falling into an agony, and praying the third time, seemed to weep, not only with his eyes, but with all the parts of his body? Nor doth it hinder us at all that the drops are said to be great, (great drops of blood, as in the English) such as the Greeks call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and the Latins Grumi; but doth rather help us. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 indeed doth sometimes signify the congealed parts of that which is liquid, and the compacted pieces of that which is powdered. But it stands very well with reason, that Christ's sweat might be thick, by reason it issued from the inmost parts of his body, and was mixed with blood, or might break out in great and eminent drops, as coming from him violently and abundantly; and being coloured with blood, and congealed with the coldness of the air, might trickle down like strings, or great drops of blood, to the very ground. The greater those drops seemed to be, the greater was that fervency of Spirit in which he prayed unto the Lord, the greater the occasion he had to pour forth those prayers. He was now in his great encounter with the powers of darkness, the safety and salvation of all mankind depended on the issue and success thereof; Angels, and Archangels, and all the hosts of heaven were gathered as it were together, to behold the combat. And then what marvel can it be, saith our learned Prelate 
(t) B. Bilson, p. 384. , if the glory of God's judgement and the power of his wrath, the number of our sins, and neglect of our own state; the sharp and eager malice of Satan (whom he had to do with) made Christ with all possible fear of the great might and Majesty of the Judge, all passionate sorrow for the crimes and contempts of the Prisoners; all earnest and zealous intention of prayer against the impugner and impediment of man's deliverance, to agonize himself into a bloody sweat? But if this sweat of our Redeemer proceeded not from natural causes, but was rather supernatural and miraculous, as Hilary, Rupertus, Beda, and others do conceive it was: neither the fear of Hell pains, nor the sense of sorrow could be the cause thereof, as some think it was: for being supernatural and miraculous, it could not have a natural and proper cause. Rather it might be wrought by God's mighty power, as a preparative to that Priesthood which he was to execute, and to that all-sufficient Sacrifice which he was to make 
(u) Id. p. 399. . For in the oblations of the law which prefigured the death of Christ, it was ordained that not only the sacrifice was to be slain by the shedding of blood, but that the person of the Priest was sanctified, as well as the sinner presented by the Priest to God, with earnest and humble prayer to make atonement for the trespass. And since the Truth must have some resemblance with the Figure, CHRIST in the Garden might perform some points required to the Priesthood, as the sanctifying of himself with his own blood, and the presenting of himself to be the redemption and remission of our sins, with instant and intensive prayer for the Transgressor's. Either of these may be admitted as agreeable to the rules of piety, though for my part I incline rather to the former, as having such a firm foundation in the Text itself.  
Thus have we taken a full view of those templations and afflictions which our Saviour suffered in his soul, (without any participation which the body had in them) under Pontius Pilate. In which though there were nothing like to the pains of Hell, (which shall be specified hereafter in a place more proper) yet there was in him such an accumulation of fears and sorrows, and disconsolations, as might entitle him most properly to be Vir dolorum, a man compounded as it were of nothing but griefs and sorrows. Next let us take a brief survey of those afflictions which he endured in his body, and suffered nor in soul at all but by the means and apprehension of the outward senses, as it participates with the body in all weal and woe. And first no sooner had he ended his devotions, and gathered together his Disciples, but behold a great multitude armed with swords and staves came to apprehend him, and carry him before the high Priests and Elders; amongst whom he was sure to find no mercy; and but little justice. judas Iscariot one of the twelve had sold his Master to them for a piece of money 
(x) Mat. 26.15. , a most contemptible piece of money too; no more than thirty pieces of silver, which in our money (reckoning each 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or piece of silver at 2 s. 6 d) 
(y) Brerewood de Ponder. c. 1.5.  comes but to 3 l. 15 s. And though they had obtained their purpose at so cheap a rate, yet they resolved that now they had him in their hands nothing should save him but a miracle. To this end they suborned false witnesses to come in against him, and if he did but offer to defend himself and refel their calumnies, they have their servants in a readiness, to smite him on the face and deride him, saying, Answerest thou the high Priest so 
(z) Joh. 18.22. ? Whether he speak or hold his peace, it comes all to one; his silence being counted a contempt, and his speech a scandal. If he pass only for a man, how dared he say, that he was able to destroy the Temple, and in three days to build it again 
(a) Mar. 26.61, 66. ? If he declare himself for the Son of God, he is presently condemned of Blasphemy; and contrary to the Laws both of God and man, which would have no man punished more than once for the same offence; he is first made a scorn and laughing stock to the standers by, and after hurried to the judge to receive his sentence. No sooner had the Priests and Elders who had bargained for him, pronounced him to be guilty of death 
(b) Mar. 14.65. , but presently they cause him to be blindfolded, that he might not see the insolences which they meant to practise: next with a joint consent they spit on his most sacred face, and buffet him, and smite him with the palms of their hands; and then say to him in derision, that if he were the Christ of God, he should prophesy unto them who is was that stroke him 
(c) Mat. 26.68. . Having thus pleased themselves with their own wickedness, they blind him like a common Malefactor, and lead him away bound unto Pontius Pilate, to have him formally condemned, and executed. The land of jewry at that time was a province of the Roman Empire; and none had power of life and death but the Roman Precedents, or such to whom they delegated part of their authority, for the ease of the subject. This made them say, it was not lawful for them to put any man to death 
(d) Joh. 18.31. , as indeed it was not; not that they did forbear it or do it in regard of the Passeover, or that it was unlawful only in respect of the time. Assuredly that bloody people who made no scruple of transgressing the whole moral law in such an execrable murder, would very easily have dispensed with the ceremonial, had that stood only in the way to their main design. But there was in it a divine providence which had so disposed it, to make him every way conform to those ancient types, which were given of him by the Lord in the Law and Prophets. Had they proceeded with him by their own old Laws, (as questionless they would have done had it been in their power) they must have stoned him to death; that being the punishment ordained for blasphemers, by the Law of Moses. But he had signified before what kind of death he should die 
(e) Joh. 1●. 32. , in the alluding of himself to the brazen Serpent, which was not in the power of any to inflict upon him, but those who did proceed upon him according the Laws of the Roman Empire.  
Well then, to Pilate he is carried, and that too early in the morning 
(f) Id. v. 28.  by the break of day. So swift their feet were to shed innocent blood, that the Governor must be wakened before his hour, to hearken to their clamorous accusations: and more than so, he must be won with fair words (if not bought with money) to come forth unto them: for fear (good souls!) lest if they came themselves into the judgment-hall they should be defiled, and consequently debarred for that time from the holy Passeover. Notable hypocites, that made no conscience of committing a most wilful murder; and yet would make the world believe that they stood upon the mint and cumin, the very niceties of the Law! But here they were to fit their Compass to another wind. The crime of Blasphemy, whereof they had convicted him amongst themselves, would not work on Pilate: who questionless had rather that the jews had been of any, or of no religion, then of what they were. That which amongst the Romans was accounted holy, was by the jews esteemed an abomination 
(g) Taci●. hist. l. 5. ; Profana illic ●●●●a qu● apud nos sacra, as it is in Tacitus. They must find somewhat else wherewithal to charge him, then that he called himself the CHRIST, or the Son of God, if they expect that Pilate should condemn him for them. And to this end they do impeach him of high treason, raising sedition in the State, and setting up another King to oppose the Romans 
(h) Luk. 23.2. ; We found, say they, this fellow per●●●ting our nation, forbidding tribute to be paid to Caesar, and call himself Christ, ● King: and whosoever makes himself a King, speaketh against Caesar at the least, and disputes his title to that Kingdom. This last was it which more persuaded with the Governor, than all the other branches of the accusation, which he knew well proceeded only from the malice of that headstrong people: and yet he was resolved to try all ways to appease their fury, at least not to imbrue his own hands in the blood of the innocent. He laboured first to satisfy the people in it, tells them he found no fault at all in the man 
(i) Joh. 18.38.31.  accused; that if they had a law which declared him guilty, they might do well to take him back, and try him according unto that. And when that would not work upon them, but that they cried out Crucify him, crucify him, with the greater violence, he caused him to be sent to Herod as being esteemed a Galilean, and consequently belonging to his jurisdiction 
(k) Luk. 23.7, 10. . Thither the chief Priests also followed him, and accused him vehemently; but could prevail no more with Herod, then before with Pilate, save that the men of war which belonged to Herod despised him as a man of no consideration, exposed him to contempt and scorn, and returned him back. Pilate then seeing how things went, and that somewhat must be done to content the jews, fell on a resolution to chastise him; (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. e. by stripes and whipping, saith Theophylact 
(l) Theop. in Luk. 23. ,) and so let him go. And this accordingly he did, for the Text saith, that Pilate took Jesus and scourged him 
(m) Joh. 19.1. . And more than so, the unruly Soldiers were permitted to abuse him in what sort they listed. They stripped him of his own clothes and arrayed him in a scarlot robe, they plaited a crown of thorns which they set on his head, and put a reed into his right hand 
(n) Mat. 27.18, 19, 20. : which done they ●owed the knee before him and mocked him, saying, Hail King of the jews; some of them in the mean time spitting on his face, some striking him with their hand, and others smiting on the head with that very reed 
(o) Joh. 19.3. , which they had put into his hands in stead of a sceptre. Never did innocent man endure such a world of contumelies; yet this was not all: for in this dress they bring him forth unto the people, that they might recreate themselves with that woeful spectacle: and Pilate like those fellows which show fights and motions, ushereth it in with Ecce homo, or Behold the man; and yet declares before them all that he found no fault in him. A most just Judge; first to pronounce him innocent, and then to scourge him; then to expose him to such scorn and misery, and after that again to pronounce him innocent: to absolve him of all crime which deserved death at the tribunal of his own conscience, and presently to give him up to the people's fury by an order and determinate sentence from the judgement seat, in foro judicii; and in conclusion, when he most wickedly and wilfully had given him over to be murdered, whom by all laws of God and Men he was bound to save, to play the open Hypocrite before all the world, washing his hands and saying in the hearing of all the multitude, that he was innocent from the blood of that righteous person 
(p) Mar. 27.19. . Never was innocent man accused more falsely, prosecuted more maliciously, nor condemned more unjustly, than our blessed Saviour.  
And now to make a brief recapitulation of our Saviour's sufferings under Pontius Pilate, (taking in some of those which are yet to come) tell me if on a due consideration of them, they were not beyond measure grievous and unsupportable; yea such as would have made any mortal man to sink under the mere burden of them to the bottom of hell: if he suffered not most bitter things from heaven, earth, and hell, and in all that any way pertained to him. He suffered at the hands of God his Father, and of men; of jews and Gentiles, of enemy's insulting and of friends forsaking, (being betrayed by one of his chief followers, forsworn by another, and abandoned by all the rest). He suffered from the Prince of darkness, and all his merciless and cruel instruments, from all the elements of the world, the Sun denying to him light, the Air breath, and the Earth supportance. He suffered in all things that pertained to him: that is to say, in his name, being condemned as a Blasphemer, an enemy to Moses, the Law, the Temple, and the worship of God, to his own nation also, to Caesar, and the Romans; traduced for a Glutton, a companion of Publicans and sinners, a Samaritan, one that had a Devil, and finally did all his miracles by the power of Belzebub: next in the things which he possessed, when they stripped him out of his garments, and cast lots upon his seamlesse coat: in his Friends, greatly discomforted and dismayed at the ●ight of so many miseries and afflictions, as were laid upon him: in his soul compassed round with sorrows, and distressed with fears besetting him on every side, and that even to death: in his body, when his cheeks were swollen with buffeting, his face defiled with being spit on, his back torn with the whip, his head pierced with the crown of thorns, his eyes offended with beholding the behaviour of his most proud insulting enemies, his ears with hearing their most execrable Blasphemies, his taste with the myrrh and gall which they gave him to drink, his smell with the stench and horror of the place wherein he was crucified, being a place of dead men's souls: and to consummate the extremity of his pains and sorrows, his hands and feet digged thorough with those nails which fastened him unto the Cross, his side boared thorough with a spear; and during all the time of his Crucifixion, his naked body publicly exposed to the view of all spectators. So that we see his sufferings under Pontius Pilate deserve to have a special place in this short compendium, this abstract of the Christian faith, of our whole religion: and that it had not been enough to have expressed his being crucified, dead, and buried, unless his sufferings under Pontius Pilate had been mentioned also. Of which three points, viz. his crucifying, death, and burial, being the consummation of his sufferings, and the last acts of his humiliation, for the accomplishing of man's Redemption, we are next to speak.    

ARTICULI 5. Pars 2da. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. i e. Crucifixus, mortuus, & sepultus. i e. Was crucified, dead and buried.  

CHAP. VII. Of the Crucifying, death, and burial of the Lord JESUS CHRIST; with Disquisition of all particulars incident thereunto.  
HItherto have we spoken of those afflictions which our Redeemer suffered under Pontius Pilate, in his soul and body, precedent to his Crucifixion; We are now come to speak of those which he suffered on the Cross itself, together with his death and burial, being the last acts of his Humiliation: for being dead and buried once, he could fall no lower. But being his death upon the Cross, was that only all-sufficient Sacrifice, made for the satisfaction of God's justice, and the redemption of all mankind from the powers of darkness, typified in so many acts and figures of the Old Testament, whereof some relate unto his death, and others to the manner of it: I shall first speak a word or two, of those rites and sacrifices, and other figures which might or did relate in Gods secret purpose to the coming of the promised Seed, and all the benefits redounding to the world by his death and passion. First for those types which might foresignify and represent the Messiahs' death, they did consist especially in those legal sacrifices, which God himself had instituted in the jewish Church, for the expiation of the sins of that people, and their reconciliation to their God, yet so that even before the law there wanted not a type and figure of it, every way as proportionable to the substance signified, as any of the Legal, and commanded sacrifices. No sooner had God raised up seed to Adam, thereby to give him hopes of the accomplishment of his deliverance and redemption by the seed of the woman; but he was taught to represent the same in a solemn sacrifice: assoon at least as his sons were come to age to assist him in it. And in process of time it came to pass 
(a) Gen. 4 3, 4.  that Cain brought of the fruits of the ground an offering to the Lord; and Abel brought of the firstlings of his flocks and the fat thereof. An offering from the hands of Cain, to show that even the wicked owe an homage to the Lord God Almighty, from whose hands they receive all their temporal blessings, and therefore were to pay back something in the way of a quitrent, or acknowledgement. Donis suis honorandus 
(b) Rupert. de Operi. S. Trinit.  est ipse qui dedit, as Rupertus hath it. A Sacrifice from the hands of Abel, of righteous Abel, as our Saviour did vouchsafe to call him; who not long after was made a Sacrifice himself by his wicked brother. As if the Lord intended in this double sacrifice to represent the death and passion of his Son Christ jesus: in that of Abel by his brother, the bloody and most barbarous fact of the wretched jews, upon their countryman, their brother of the house of jacob; in that of Abel's lamb, the sacrifice of the Lamb of God, slain from the beginning of the world 
(c) Apoc. 5.9. : as the Apostle in the Revelation. Now for the Legal sacrifices prescribed the jews, and those which had been offered by God's faithful servants, before the giving of the Law; they do so far agree in one, as to be comprised in the same general definition. For generally a sacrifice may be defined to be, the offering of a creature to Almighty God by the hands of a lawful Minister, to be spent or consumed in his service. Which definition I desire the Reader to take notice of, because we shall relate unto it when we come to speak of the Christian sacrifice, or the Commemoration of this sacrifice in the Church of Christ. Bellarmine in more words saith no more than this 
(d) Bellarm. de Missa. l. ●. c. . His words be these, Sacrificium est externa oblatio soli deo facta, qua per Legitimum ministrum creatura aliqua sensibilis & permane●s ad agnitionem Divinae Majestatis & infirmitatis humanae, ritu mystico consecratur & transmutatur. Only the last word transmutatur was put in of purpose, to countenance the change or transubstantiation of the outward Elements into the natural body and blood of C●rist: which notwithstanding he is fain after to expound by the word destruitur, i. e. consumed or destroyed, to make his Mass as true, as proper, and as real a Sacrifice of Christ our Saviour on the Altar, as that which he himself once offered on the accursed Cross. But all the Sacrifices of God's people before the Law, were principally (if not only) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, such as were offered unto God by way of thankfulness, and due acknowledgement, for all his benefits conferred on their souls and bodies. Of which kind also were the peace-offerings, Levit. 3. v. 1. the sacrifice of thanksgiving, Levit. 7.12. and the freewill offering, vers. 16. in use amongst the jews when the Law was given: in celebrating which they were left at liberty to offer either male or female 
(e) Leu. c. 3. v. 1.6. , as they would themselves; God giving his increase of their flocks and herds by both the sexes, male and female, and pouring on both sexes, man and woman, both temporal and spiritual blessings. Under the law the case was otherwise. For then besides the Eucharistical sacrifices before remembered, (which for the substance and intent were before in use amongst their Ancestors the holy Patriarches, though not accompanied with so many ceremonies) they had sacrifices of another kind●, which they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is to say, expiatory or propitiatory, for the taking away of their sins. In which as they did signify by the death of the beast, the wages due to their iniquities, (for the wages of sin is death 
(f) Rom. 6. , saith the great Apostle) so by the shedding of his blood did God please to intimate that they should have the pardon and forgiveness of their sins, and acceptation of their service, by the blood of Christ. These then, and only these were Typi venturae victimae, the types and shadows of that great and perfect Sacrifice which Christ our Saviour was to offer for the sins of mankind: and were called expiatory and propitiatory, non proprie sed relative; not properly, and in themselves, as if there were in them any power or virtue, either to expiate our offences, or be a Propitiation for our sins, (for the blood of Bulls and Goats cannot take away sins 
(g) Heb. 9 , saith the same Apostle) but relatively in relation to the Ordinance of Almighty God by whom they had been instituted to that end and purpose, as Baptism after was in the Church of Christ. And for that cause the people in the celebrating of these solemn sacrifices, used to confess their sins to the Lord their God; and by that means did make the Sacrifice more acceptable, and their atonement with the Lord more assured and certain; but expiate ●ins those Sacrifices of their own nature neither did nor could. In which sense Chrysostom said well, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(i) Chrysost. hom. 17. in H●b. . The LEGAL SACCRIFISE, saith he, was rather an accusation than an expiation; a confession rather of their weakness then a profession of their strength. Now there are many things observable in these Legal Sacrifices, which were performed and really made good in our Lord and Saviour. For first the Sacrifice or Beast sacrificed was to be a male, Levit. 1.3. and to be a male also without spot, or blemish, or any corporal defect: And so it was with Christ our Saviour, the son of David, in whose lips there was found no guile, in whom there was no sinful blemish, no defect of righteousness. The man who brought the sacrifice was to present it at the door of the Tabernacle, and to lay his hand upon the head of it, (in testimony that he laid all his sins thereon) that it might be accepted as an atonement for him, Levit. 1.3, 4. And so CHRIST took upon him our infirmities, and bore our sicknesses, Matth. 8.17. and bore our sins in his own body on the Tree, 1 Pet. 2.24. The Sacrifice being brought before the door of the Tabernacle was after bound with cords, (Bind the Sacrifice with cords to the horns of the Altar, Psal. 118.) slain by the Priest, and his blood sprinkled round about upon the Altar, and then burnt with fire 
(k) Levit. 1.6. . So the Redeemer of the world was led bound to Pilate, Matth. 27.2. and after fastened to the Altar of the Cross with cords of iron, employed in this, that they crucified him, Matth. 27.35 i.e. they nailed him to the Cross. The Sacrificer was himself, Ipse enim & Sacrificium & Sacerdos 
(l) August. Confess. lib. 10 c. 43. , for he himself was both the Sacrifice and the Priest, as St. Austin hath it; offering his body to the Lord, that by the hands of wicked and unrighteous men it might be crucified and slain; and the whole Cross, the Altar upon which he suffered, besprinkled round about with his precious blood issuing from his hands and feet, and wounded side. As for the burning of the sacrifice, which was usual in their whole burnt offerings, what could it signify but those pains and sorrows, that bitter cup and all the terrible pangs thereof, which even burned up his heart and consumed his spirits, in the whole act of his crucifixion? unless perhaps the ascending of the flames on high, might signify the the gracious acceptation of the sacrifice by the Lord their God, as in that of Noah 
(m) Gen. 8.21. , which carried up a sweet savour to the God of Heaven. In which regard, a sweet savour, and an offering made by fire, do seem to be Synonymas in the Book of God, as Exod. 24.41. Levit. 3.5. And what more pleasing savour could ascend to God, what could he smell more acceptable from the sons of men, than the oblation made unto him of the Son of God, reconciling the world unto his Father? Finally, as the bodies of those beasts which were brought into the Sanctuary by the high Priest for sin, (which was a differing kind of Sacrifice from the whole burnt offering) were burnt without the Camp: so Jesus also (saith St. Paul) that he might sacrifice the people with his own blood suffered without the Gate, Heb. 13.11, 12. And of this sort of Types and Figures were both the Anniversary Sacrifice of the Paschal lamb, and the daily sacrifice of the two lambs, one for the morning, and the other for the evening, Exod. 29. both of them shadowing or prefiguring in God's intention, though not in the intent of the ignorant jews, that all-sufficient Sacrifice of the Lamb of God, which really and truly taketh away the sins of the world 
(n) Joh. 1.29. . How far they are appliable in their other circumstances, we shall see elsewhere.  
As for the manner of Christ's death and passion, there were also some Types and figures of it, as well before the Law, as after. What else was that of Isaac the promised seed, the only and beloved son of his Father Abraham, from whom the blessing promised by Almighty God to all the Nations of the world 
(o) Gen. 18.18. , was to be derived; commanded by an order from the Court of Heaven, to be offered to the Lord for a burnt offering 
(p) Gen. 22.2. ? What did it signify or prefigure but the offering of our Saviour CHRIST the dearly beloved Son of God, in whom his Father was well pleased, the expectation of the Gentiles, conceived so miraculously beyond hope and reason, above the common course of nature, more than Isaac was? The mountain on which that sacrifice was to be performed 
(q) ibid. , what did it signify, but that CHRIST should be offered up to God on a mountain also, even the mount of Calvarie? Luk. 23.33. What else the laying of the wood upon Isaac's shoulders, wherewith himself the sacrifice, was to be burned; but the compelling CHRIST to take up that Cross 
(r) Joh. 19.17.  whereon himself was to be crusified, till Simon the Cyrenian came that way by chance 
(r) Mar. 15.10. ; to ease him of that heavy burden? The calling of the Angel out of heaven to Abraham, bidding him stay his hand and not strike the blow, by means whereof poor Isaac was reprieved from slaughter 
(s) Gen. 22.11. : doth it not clearly signify the sending of an Angel from heaven to CHRIST our Saviour, to comfort him in the midst of his fears and troubles 
(t) Luk. 22.43. , and to deliver him from those fears and terrors which make death dreadful unto mankind, that he might undergo it with the greater cheerfulness? And when the Devil had tried all ways imaginable to prevail upon him, out of a confident presumption to effect his ends, and work some sinful and corrupt affections to have power upon him: what got he at last but a breathless carcase, a short dominion of his body? The Ram, the fleshy part of CHRIST was all, which fell unto his share, in that bloody sacrifice; and that he was to take, or nothing, in stead of the Son, the Son of the eternal everliving God, whom he expected as a prey, and in hope had swallowed. And yet this Type though full of clear and excellent significancies, comes not so home to my purpose, unto the manner of Christ's death, as doth the Type and story of the Brazen Serpent. The people journeying in the Wilderness, and murmuring (as they did too often) against God and Moses, had provoked the Lord 
(u) Numb. 21.5, 6. . And the Lord sent fiery Serpents amongst the people, and they bit the people, and much people of Israel died. No remedy for this but upon repentance. And when the people had repent, the Lord said to Moses, Fac Serpentem aeneum, etc. i. e. 
(x) Ibid. v. 8.  Make thee a Brazen Serpent, and set it upon a pole, and it shall come to pass that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it he shall live. What use makes CHRIST the Lord of this? As Moses lifted up the Serpent in the Wilderness 
(y) Joh. 3.14, 15 , even so must the son of man be lifted up; that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have eternal life. Never was type more perfect and exact then that. Man by his sins committed against God the Lord, had provoked his anger; and the Lord gave him over to the hands of the old Serpent the Devil, who pierced them with his fiery darts, consumed them with the heats of lust, and drew them into everlasting danger both of soul and body. No way to cure them of those wounds which the sting of sin and Satan had occasioned in them, no way to quench those flames of natural concupiscence which were kindled in them; and setting them at liberty from the powers of hell; but by fastening Christ upon the Cross, as was the Brazen Serpent on the top of the pole: that whosoever looked on him with the eyes of faith, might have the world crucified unto them, and they themselves unto the world. The Ancients 
(y) August. in joh. 3. & in Gal. 3. & contr. Adimant. & Leo de Passi. Serm. 10. etc.  generally did thus interpret and apply our Redeemers words, as being most agreeable to the scope of the place, and to another of his Prophecies concerning himself, saying, that he should be delivered unto the Gentiles, to be mocked, scourged, and crucified 
(z) Mat. 20.19. , and thereby signifying what death he should die, joh. 18.32. Calvin indeed of late days will not have it so, affirming that this application of our Saviour's words, nec textui quadrat, nec instituto, is neither agreeable to the Text, nor our Saviour's purpose: and that the plain and genuine meaning of the words is no more than this, Quod Evangelii promulgatione erigendus sit Christus 
(a) Calvin in joh. c. 3. , that the name of Christ should be advanced by the preaching or promulgating of the Gospel. But whether this agree with our Saviour's purpose in making a comparison of himself, (or rather of his lifting up, as Moses lifted up the Brazen Serpent) any which hath eyes to see, and is not wilfully blind with prejudice or prepossession may discern most easily! Compare the fifth and sixth verses of the 21. of Numbers, with the 14. and 15. of the third of john, and tell me, any man that hath not absolutely captivated his own judgement to another man's sense, if ever Type and Antitype did agree more punctually. The parallel goes further yet, but beyond this purpose. For as the Brazen Serpent of a remedy did become a disease, and was made an Idol of an Hieroglyphic, the Children of Israel (in the times succeeding) burning incense to it 
(b) 2 King. 18.4. : So was it also with the Cross or Crucifix, in these later ages. For who knoweth not how impiously it hath been abused to Idolatry in the Church of Rome, how grossly it hath been adored by all sorts of people; and with what impudence the greatest and most learned men have bestirred themselves in defence of that most palpable and gross Idolatry: Bellarmine 
(c) Bellarm. de sanct. cult. l. 2.25.  sparing not to say, (though he hope to save himself by a strange distinction of his own) that the same honour which is due to Christ crucified, is to be also given to the Cross or Crucifix. But this is only by the way, if it be not out of it, I return again.  
These passages premised, we now proceed unto the story of our Saviour's passion. We left him last in pilate's Hall. The Priests and people of the jews cried out to have him crucified according to the Roman fashion. No death but that which was accounted the most shameful and most ignominious of all manner of deaths, and was pronounced to be accursed, (He is accursed of God that hangeth on the tree 
(d) Deut. 21.23. ,) by the Law of Moses; would content their malice. And Pilate gave sentence (saith the Text) that it should be as they required 
(e) Luk. 23.24. ; and delivered him to them to be crucified 
(f) Matth. 27.26. . CHRIST had not else redeemed us from the curse of the Law, (for cursed is he that abideth not in all the words of this law to do them, Deut. 27.26.) had he not been made a curse for us 
(g) Gal. 3.13. , that is to say, had he not willingly submitted to that death of the Cross, of which the Lord thus said by the mouth of Moses, Cursed is every one that is hanged on a tree, Deut. 21.23. the curse and rigour of the law being laid upon him. Christ was no otherwise made a curse then so, by enduring this most shameful death of the Cross, this mortem autem Crucis 
(h) Phil. 2.8. , for the sins of man. God saith St. Ambrose made Christ a curse after the same manner, as a sacrifice for sin in the law is called sin, 
(i) Ambros. in Gal. c. 3.  Bropterea pro maledictis oblatus factus est Maledictum; and therefore being a Sacrifice for those who were accursed, he became a curse. CHRIST (saith St. Chrysostom) was not made subject to the curse of transgression (which is the greatest curse a man can fall into, and that which makes him most detested and hated of God) but admitted in himself another curse, 
(k) Chrysost. in Gal. c. 3.  that is, the punishment of sin, or the curse for sin: and this, saith he, is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, another curse but not the same. CHRIST then was made a curse for us, not that he was detested of God, or deprived of blessedness, (which was the curse denounced by Moses against those who kept not the words of the law to do them): but that he was adjudged to this shameful and inglorious death, which God and man did hold accursed; abolishing one curse and undergoing another, Et vincens maledictum de maledicto 
(l) August. in Gal. 3. , as St. Augustine hath it. But to go on, our Saviour being condemned to this cursed death, a death which none but Thiefs and Murderers, and false Bondmen were condemned by the laws of Rome; they hale him to the same with as cursed a violence: sparing no cruelty or disgrace as they led him to it, which a barbarous people could inflict, or an innocent suffer. They made him carry that Cross at first, on his own shoulders, which after was to carry his whole body. And when they eased him of that burden, and laid it upon Simon the Cyrenians back, it was not out of pity, but upon design; that coming more fresh and lively to the place of suffering, he might the longer be a dying, and they the longer glut their eyes with that pleasing spectacle. It was the custom of the jews as of other people, to give wine to those who were condemned, and led to their execution, to comfort and revive their spirits, the better to enable them for the stroke of death. Even this humanity shall be corrupted to increase his miseries, and add unto the scorn which which were put upon him. In stead of wine, some of them gave him vinegar mixed with Gall 
(m) Matth. 27.3, 4.  to drink, and thereby literally fulfilled in him, that which was metaphorically said of himself by David, in some time of his troubles, when he was fed with the bread of sorrow and the waters of affliction: viz. 
(o) Psal. 69▪ 21.  they gave me gall for meat, and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink. They stripped him of his garments which they shared amongst them, and lifting up his naked body (a lamentable spectacle of reproach and shame) extended him upon the Cross, stretched him in all his joints till the sinews cracked, and so nailed him fast: thereby accomplishing that in him, which was foresignified by David, (but literally executed upon Christ, not David) they have pierced my hands and feet, Psal. 22.16. Nor stayed they here, but to add shame and infamy to his other sufferings, they cause him to be crucified between two Malefactors, to make the world believe, if it had been possible, that they were equally involved in the same guilt, because involved alike in the same condemnation. Nay more than that, vinegar and gall which they gave him to drink, was but a taft of that extremity of gall and bitterness, which they had in their hearts; which they did vomit out in blasphemous words, exposing him to contempt and scorn, not only with the bystanders, but the passers by; the very malefactors joining with them to increase his sorrows, as if thereby they could have mitigated and removed their own. So that he might most justly have cried out and said, 
(p) Lam. 1.12.  Consider and behold all ye that pass by the way, if ever there were sorrow like my sorrow which was done unto me, wherewith the Lord afflicted me in the day of the fierceness of his wrath. Never so true a man of sorrows. In which extremity of pain and grief of heart, no wonder if nature made a start, and seemed to tremble at the apprehension of so many miseries, especially considering that the most bitter draught of that deadly CUP was to drink off yet. And in this anguish and distress it was that he cried aloud, 
(q) Mat. 27.46.  Eli, Eli, Lamasaba●hthani, that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? Which words, because they seem to some to be an argument o● proof for those hellish pains, which they have fancied to themselves in the soul of Christ; by others are conceived to proceed out of desperation 
(r) B. bilson's survey, p. 289. , which is indeed one of the greatest torments in the pit of hell: we will the rather look into them, to see whether any such constructions can be gathered thence.  
Now for the clearer exposition of this text of Scripture we will lay these grounds, 1. That dereliction and forsaking do no where throughout God's book, import damnation, but are applied always to the judgements of this present life. 2. That in wicked and udgodly men, it argueth reprobation from grace, and despair of glory, which to imagine of CHRIST were rather a most furious blasphemy than an erroneous folly. 3. That in the godly, (as in David whose words they were) they either note destitution of help, or diminution of comfort; but neither in David nor in Christ the true pains of the damned: and 4. That no construction must be made of these words which may decrease in Christ the fullness of truth and grace, which never wanted in his soul, or draw him within the compass of mistaking or mistrusting God's favour towards him. For how could he be tainted with any distrust of God's mercy and purpose towards him, who with such confidence commended his pure Spirit into the hands of his Father 
(s) Luk. 22.46. ; who in the midst of his extremities did promise to invest the penitent Thief in the joys of Paradise 
(t) Vers. 43. ; and finally, who in the height of his afflictions, when he spoke these words, had such an interest in God as to call him his own God. My God, my God, and not God only, as the text informs us. Which grounds so laid, we may the better understand the meaning of the words before us, and what construction they will bear, agreeable and conform to the rule of faith. And first I know that many of the ancient Fathers were of opinion, that as Christ took upon him at this time the person of all mankind, so he made this complaint not in behalf of himself, but of his members; as when he said to Saul in another case, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me 
(u) Act. 9.4. , he did not mean it of his person which was then in heaven, but of his Church militant here on earth. Thus Cyprian for the Latin Fathers, Quod pro iis voluisti intelligi, qui deseri a Deo propter peccata meruerant 
(x) Cyprian. de passione. ; this complaint of being forsaken, thou wouldst have understood (as spoken) of them who had deserved to be forsaken of God in regard of their sins. To the same purpose Augustine, Epistola 120. and Leo in his 16. Sermon de Passione. Thus also venerable Beda, Quare dereliquis●i me, i.e. meos, etc. 
(y) Beda in Ps. 21. . Why, saith he, hast thou forsaken me, i. e. mine; because sin (saith he) did keep them back from saving me, that is mine. It is plain then, that the head doth not speak here in his own Person; for how could he be possibly forsaken, or out of hope of salvation? Thus Athanasius for the Greeks 
(z) At hanas. de in carnat. Chri.  (in fewer words, but as significantly as the others) Christ spoke these words in our person, for he was never forsaken of God. And to this purpose speaks Theodoret in Psal. 21. and Euthymius on the same place also. Thus also Damascene, Christ saith he, having put on our person, and appropriated the same unto him, prayed on that sort; 
(a) Damas. de fide Orthod. 3.24.  as when a man doth put on another's person out of pity or charity, and in his stead speaks such words sometimes, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as do not agree unto himself.  
But this construction of the text, though both pious and profitable, is not so generally received but that some others of the Fathers do expound them otherwise, who think that this complaint was poured out by Christ, because he saw himself left helpless to the rage of the jews, and that he seemed so long forsaken of his heavenly Father, not in regard of inward grace and comfort, but of outward help. An exposition so agreeable to the text in all the circumstances of it, that some of those, who did expound the same of Christ's not speaking in his own person, but in the person of his members, do approve thereof. For thus St. Hierom 
(b) Hieron. in Matth. 27. .  
Marvel not at Christ's complaint of being forsaken, when thou seest the scandal of the Cross. St. Ambrose thus, 
(c) Ambros. de fide l. 2. c. 3.  He speaketh as a man, which was no shame for him to do, because that we ourselves when we are in danger, do think ourselves forsaken of God. Which words Venerable Bede, Rabanu● Maurus, and Aquinas in their Expositions of this Scripture do repeat and follow. And this St. Augustine well approves of, Quare me dereliquisti, tanquam dicere●, relinquendo me, etc. 
(d) August. Ep. 120. . Why hast thou forsaken me, as if he should have said, by leaving me in the time of my trouble; because not hearing me when I call upon thee, thou art far off from my salvation, praesenti scilicet salute hujus vitae, that is to say, in reference to this present life. And Lyra also saith the same, though of later date, 
(e) Lyra in Mat. 27.  Dixit Christus se derelictum a Deo Patre, quia dimittebat eum in manibus occidentium; i. e. Christ saith, he was forsaken of God his Father, because he was left in the hands of them that slew him. And so Theodoret for the Greeks 
(f) Theodoret. Psal. 21. , CHRIST (saith he) calleth that a dereliction (or forsaking of God) which was a permission of the Godhead, that the humanity might suffer. With these agree some Doctors of the Protestant Churches of great name and credit, as Bucer and Bullinger in their Comments on the 27. of S. Matthew, and Munster in his observations on the 21. Psalm. Other forsaking, other dereliction, more than the leaving of him in the hands of his enemies, they acknowledge none: sure I am no withdrawing from him of the divine presence and assistance of God. For so Tertullian doth affirm, that God was said to have forsaken him (in a sort) dum hominem ejus tradidit in mortem, 
(g) Tertul. adv. Praxeam c. 30.  whilst he delivered him in his humane nature to the hands of death; but that he did not leave him (altogether) in that it was into the hands of his Father, that he commended his Spirit. Fulgentius saith as much, or more; saying, that though in the death of Christ his soul was to forsake his dying body 
(h) Fulgent. ad Thrasimund. l. 3. , Divinitas tamen Christi nec ab anima nec a earn potest separari suscepta; yet the Divinity could not be separated from his soul, nor from the body neither, which it had assumed: And how far Christ was then from thinking that he had either lost the favour of Almighty God, or his own interest in disposing of the heavenly glories, doth evidently appear by that of Hilari●: derelinqui se ad mortem questus est, sed tunc Confessorem suum secum in regno Paradisi suscepit 
(i) Hilarius de Trinitate l. 10. . CHRIST, saith he, doth complain of his being forsaken, or left unto the powers of death; and yet even then he received the Thief that did confess him into the assured hopes of Paradise: Where by the way, all the forsaking, which this Father doth take notice of, was derelictio ad mortem, a leaving of our Saviour to the hands of death. The Schoolmen also say the same, who make six kinds of dereliction or forsaking, according as I find them in our Reverend Field 
(k) Dr. Field of the Church, l. 5. c. 18. . 1. By disunion of person, 2. by loss of grace, 3. by diminution or weakness of grace, 4. by want of the assurance of future deliverance and present support, 5. by denial of protection; and 6. by withdrawing all solace, and destituting the forsaken of all present comfort. Then they declare, that it is an impious thing to think that Christ was forsaken any of the four first ways, in that the unity of his Person was never dissolved, his graces neither taken away nor diminished; no possibility that he should want assurance either of present support or future deliverance. But for the two last ways, he may be rightly said (say they) to have been forsaken, in that his Father had denied to protect and keep him out of the hands of his cruel, bloody, and merciless enemies, no way restraining them, but suffering them to do the uttermost of that which their wicked malice could invent; and that nothing might be wanting to make his sorrows beyond measure sorrowful, had withdrawn from him also that accustomed solace which he was wont to find in God, and removed from him all those things which might any way assuage the extremity of his pain and misery. The Master of the Sentences gives it thus more briefly; 
(l) Pet. Lomb. Sent. l. 3. c. 21.  Separavit se divinitas quia substraxit protectionem; separavit se foris, ut non esset ad defensionem; sed non intus defuit ad unionem. All the forsaking then that the Lord complained of on the Cross, was, that he had been left to the hands of his enemies, and that his heavenly Father had forborn all this while to show any open sign of love or favour towards him in the sight of the jews, by whom he had been so afflicted, and reproached, and indeed blasphemed. This is the most that can be said of this bitter and compassionte cemplaint which our Saviour made, whether in reference to himself, or to all mankind, or perhaps to both; unless it may be further added, that he desired in these words, as some think he did 
(m) B. Bilson. p. 420. , that God would please to manifest by some public sign, what an esteem he had of that sacred Person whom both the jews and Gentiles had so much oppressed and despised, and of whom he had seemed all this while to make little reckoning. And this is that which Athanasius hath observed 
(n) Athanas. cont. Arian. Oration. 4.  in his fourth Oration or Discourse against the Arians who stood much upon it; Lo (saith he) upon Christ's speech (why hast thou forsaken me) the Father showed himself to be even then in Christ, as ever before. For the earth knowing her Lord to speak did straightway tremble, and the veil rend in twain, and the Sun did hide himself, and the rocks clavae in sunder, and the graves were opened, and the dead men rose. And that which was no less marvellous indeed, the standers by which before denied him, confessed him to be the Son of God.  
To proceed then, this exclamation being made, and gaining no more from the standers by, but addition of scorn to misery, and contempt to scorn, the people mocking him, as if he had called upon Elias to come and help him; he cried out, I thirst 
(o) Joh. 19.28. : and even the matter of that cry, gives them another opportunity to put a scorn upon him, and increase his griefs. One of them, saith the Scripture, ran and took a sponge, and filled it with vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave it him to drink Matth. 27.48. Where mark the malice of the man, (if he may so be called, which had no humanity). Our Saviour called for drink to assuage his thirst; the wicked fellow gives him vinegar, not to accelerate his death, or send him out of hand to the other world, for fear Elias indeed should come to help him, as 
(p) Theoph. in Mat. 27.  Theophylact thinks, but rather to continue him the longer in those terrible pains. It is the quality of vinegar, as we read in Pliny, that it stauncheth the effusion of blood. Sanguinis profluvium sistunt ex aceto 
(q) Plin. Hist. Nat. , as that Author hath it. And therefore I concur with them, who think this vinegar was given him to no other end, but out of a most barbarous purpose to prolong his torments, for fear lest otherwise he might bleed to death, and put too speedy an end to their sports and triumphs. But contrary to the expectation of this wicked man, no sooner had our Saviour took a taste thereof, but the work was finished. He cried out with a loud voice (Matth. 27.50.) It is finished, (Joh. 19.30.) and presently he bowed his head 
(r) Joh. 19.30.  and said, Father into thy hands I commend my Spirit, and having thus said, he gave up the ghost 
(s) Luk. 23.46. . In which it is to be observed that Christ now seeing all was finished, which God required at his hands to the satisfaction of his justice for the sins of man, and having fulfilled all those things which were spoken of him by the Prophets; did voluntarily of his own accord, deliver up his soul into the hands of his Father. He had before told us of himself, that he was the good Shepherd, which giveth his life for the sheep, joh. 10.11. that no man had power to take it from him, (Si nemo, utique nec mors, and if none, than not death, as we read in Chrysostom 
(t) Feria 5. Passion. Serm. 6.  but that he laid it down of himself, vers. 18. and that he gave his life as a ransom for many, Matth. 20.28. And the event showed that he was no braggart, or had said more than he was able to perform. For the Evangelists declare that he had sense and speech, and voluntary motion to the last gasp of his breath; all which do evidently fail in the sons of men, before the soul parteth from the body. Which breathing out of his soul so presently, upon so strong a cry, and so loud a prayer, seemed so miraculous to the Centurion who observed the same, that without expecting any further Miracle, he acknowledged presently, that truly this was the Son of God. And this St. Hierom noted rightly 
(u) Hieron. ad Hedib. qu. 8. , The Centurion hearing Christ say to his Father, Into thy hands I commend my Spirit, & statim sponte dimisisse spiritum, and presently of his own accord to give up the ghost, moved with the greatness of the wonder, said, Truly this man was the Son of God. The Fathers generally do affirm the same, ascribing this last act of our Saviour's Tragedy, not to extremity of pain, or loss of blood, to any outward violence, or decay of spirits, but as his own voluntary deed: and that though God the Father had decreed he should die, yet he did give him leave and power to lay down his life of his own accord; that his obedience to the will and pleasure of his heavenly Father might appear more evidently, and the oblation of himself be the more acceptable. And to this purpose saith St. Ambrose, 
(x) Ambros. de incarnate. c. 5.  Quasi arbiter exuendi suscipiendique corporis emisit spiritum, non amisit, i. e. he did not lose his soul though he breathed it forth, as one that had it in his own power, both to assume his body and to put it off. Eusebius to the same purpose also, When no man had power over Christ's soul, he himself of his own accord laid it down for man 
(y) Euseb. de dem. Evang. l. 1.8. & lib. 3. c. 6. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and so being free at his own disposing, and not overruled by outward force, he himself of himself made his departure from the body. The judgement of the rest of the Father's touching this particular, he that list to see, let him consult St. Augustine, lib. 4 de Trinit. c. 13. Victor Antiochen. in Marc. c. 15. Leo de Passione Dom. serm. 16. Fulgentius lib. 3. ad Thrasimundum, Sedulius in Opere Paschali lib. 5. c. 17. Beda in Matth. c. 27. Bernard in Feria 4. Hebdom. poenosae. And for the Greeks, Athanasius, Orat. 4. contra Arianos. Origen in joh. Hom. 19 Gregory Nyssen, in Orat. 1. de Christi Resurrectione; Nazianzen in his Tragedy called Christus patience. Chrysostom in Matth. 27. Homil. 89. Theophylact on the 27. of Matth. and the 23. of Mark. and the 23. of Luke. And for late Writers, Erasmus on Luk. 23. and Mark. 15. Musculus on the 27. of Matthew, and Gualther Hom. 169. on john; all which attest most punctually to the truth of this, that the death of Christ was not merely natural, proceeding either from any outward or inward causes, but only from his own great power, and his holy will. And to what purpose note they this, but first to show the conquest which he had of death, whom he thus swallowed up in victory 
(z) 1 Cor. 15. , as the Apostle doth express it: and secondly, to show that whereas natural death was the wages of sin, which could not be inflicted on him in whom no sin was; he therefore did breath out his soul in another manner, then is incident to the sons of men, to make himself a freewill offering to the Lord his God, and make himself a sacrifice for the sins of mankind, by yielding willingly to that death which their sins deserved? And to this death, this voluntary, but bodily death of the Lord CHRIST JESUS, and to that alone, the Scriptures do ascribe that great work of the world's redemption. For thus St. Paul unto the Romans, When we were enemies we were reconciled to God, by the death of his Son, Rom. 5.11. to the Hebrews thus, For this cause he is the Mediator of the New Testament, that by means of death for the redemption of the transgressions which were under the first Testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance, Heb. 9.15. if by Christ's death, it must be by his bodily death, by effusion of his blood, and by no other death or kind of death of what sort soever. And to this truth the Scriptures witness very frequently. For thus St. Paul, we have redemption through his blood, Ephes. 1.7. By his own blood hath he entered into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. Heb. 9.12 St. Peter thus, Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as with silver and gold, but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a Lamb without blemish, and without spot. 1 Pet. 1.18, 19 Finally, thus the Elders say unto the Lamb in the Revelation, Thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God, by thy blood, Apocal. 5 9 Which being so, it is most certain that Christ abolished sin and Satan, by suffering his body to be slain, & his blood to be shed unto the death or the sins of the world; and not by any other way or means coordinate with it, as some lately fable.  
Yet so it is, that some men not content with that way of Redemption which is delivered in the Scriptures, have fancied to themselves another and more likely means for perfecting that great work of the death of Christ, and teach us that the shedding of his blood to the death of his body had not been sufficient for the remission of our sins, if he had not also suffered the death of the soul 
(a) B. bilson's Epistle to King james. , and thereby wholly ransomed us from the wrath of God. Calvin first led the dance in this, affirming very desperately (that I say no worse) Nihil actum esse si corporea tantum morte defunctus fuisset, that Christ had done nothing to the purpose, if he had died no other than a bodily death 
(b) Calvin. in Harmon. Evangel. . He must then die the death of the soul, seeing that his bodily death would not serve the turn; and they who pretermit this part of our Redemption (never known before) and do insist so much externo carnis supplicio in the outward sacrifice of his flesh, are insulsi nimis, but silly fellows at the best, be they what they will; neither the Fathers nor Apostles, no nor Christ himself (for aught I can see) to be excepted. Which error being thus sprung up, did in an Age so apt to novelties and innovations, meet with many followers; and some, too many indeed in this Church of England: some of them teaching, as it is affirmed by their learned Adversary, that Christ redeemed our souls by the death of his soul, 
(c) B. bilson's Survey, p. 132.  as our bodies by the death of his body. Now whereas the soul is subject to a twofold death, the one by sin prevailing on it in this life, which is the natural depriving, or voluntary renouncing of all grace; the other by damnation in the world to come, which is the just rejecting of all the wicked from any fellowship with God in his glory, and fastening them to everlasting torments in hell fire: I would fain know which of these deaths it was, the first or second, which our Saviour suffered in his soul. I think they do not mean the last, and am sure they cannot prove the first: for to talk, as some of them have done, that there may be a death of the soul, a curse and separation from God 
(d) Id. ibid. p. 365. , which of itself is neither sin, nor conjoined with sin, is such a Monster in Divinity, as was never heard of till this Age. Certain I am the Scripture only speaks of two kinds of death, the first and the second, both which we find expressed in the Revelation: where it is said 
(e) Apoc. 21.8.  the fearful and the unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and Idolaters, and all liars, (all which no doubt are under the arrest of the first death, whereof he speaketh, chap. 2. vers. 11.) shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone; which is the second death. And sure I am, the Fathers, if they may be credited, are contrary in terms express to this new device; not only acknowledging no death in Christ but the death of the body, but also utterly disclaiming this pretended death of the soul. In quo nisi in corpore, expiavit populi peccata? 
(f) Ambros. de fide l. 3. c. 5.  in quo passus est nisi in corpore? Wherein (saith Ambrose) did he expiate the sins of the people, but in his body? wherein did he suffer (death) but in his body? St. Austin to this purpose also, Sacerdos propter victimam, quam pro nobis offerret, a nobis acceptam; 
(g) August. in Psalm. 109.  that Christ was made or called a Priest, by reason of that sacrifice which he took of us, that he might offer it for us; which could be nothing but our body. More plainly and exclusively, Fulgentius thus, 
(h) Fulgent. ad Thrasimund. l. 3.  Moriente carne, non solum deitas, sed nec anima Christi potest ostendi comm●rtua; that when Christ died in the flesh, neither his Deity nor his soul can be demonstrated to have died also with it. The greatest Doctors of the Greek Churches do affirm the same. Christ (saith Theodoret) was called an high Priest in his humane nature 
(i) Theodoret Dialog▪ 1. ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and offered none other sacrifice but his body only. And thus Theophylact; A Priest may by no means be without a sacrifice; It was necessary then that Christ should have somewhat to offer 
(k) Theop. in Heb. 8. : Quod autem offerretur praeter ejus corpus nihil quippiam erat; and there was nothing which he had to offer but his body only. Athanasius in his third Oration against the Ari●ns, and Nazianzen on that text, When jesus had finished all those sayings, do affirm the same; but not so clearly and exclusively as the others did. Now as here is no death of the soul which possibly may be imagined to have happened to Christ, if we will be judged by the Scriptures; and as the Father's Greek and Latin do so significantly and expressly disclaim the same: so is it such an horrid speech, such a pang of blasphemy, as should not come within the heart, nor issue from the mouth of any Christian. But this I only touch at now. We shall hear more of it in the next Article touching the descent into hell, where it shall be presented to us in another colour. I end this point at this time with that of Augustine 
(l) Aug. Sermon. 161. , There is a first death, and there is a second. The first death hath two parts, one whereby the sinful soul by transgressing departeth from her Creator; the other whereby she is excluded from her body as a punishment inflicted on her by the judgement of God. The second death is the everlasting torment of the body and soul. Either of these deaths had laid hold upon every man, but that the righteous and immortal Son of God came to die for us, in whose flesh because there could be no sin, he suffered the punishment of sin without the guilt of it. And to that end admitted (or endured) for us the second part of the first death, that is to say, the death of the body only, by which he ransomed us from the dominion of sin, and the pain of eternal punishment which was due unto it.  
But yet there is another argument which concludes more fully against this new device of theirs, than any testimonies of the Fathers before produced; mamely, the institution of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, by the Lord himself: in which there is a commemoration to be held for ever, both of the breaking of his body, and of the effusion of his blood, by which his bodily death is represented and set forth till his coming again 
(n) 1 Cor. 11.26. ; but no remembrance instituted or commanded for the death of his soul. Which if it were of such an unquestionable truth, as these men conceive; and of such special use and efficacy to the world's redemption, as they gave it out; would doubtless have been honoured with some special place, in that commemoration of his Sacrifice which himself ordained. Who in the same night he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks he broke it and said, Take eat, this is my body which is broken for you; this do in remembrance of me 
(o) Ib. v. 23, 24. : and likewise after the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new Testament (sealed) in my blood (which is shed 
(p) Luk. 22.30.  for you); this do as oft as ye drink in remembrance of me. In which (and more than this we find not in the book) there is not one word which doth reflect on the death of his soul, or any commemoration or remembrance to be held of that. Only we find, that as our Saviour by his death which was then at hand, did put an end to all the legal rites and sacrifices of the old Testament, which were but the shadows of things to come, as St. Paul calls them, Coloss. 2.17. So having fulfilled in the flesh all that had been foresignifyed and spoken of him in the Law and Prophets, he did of all ordain and institute one only Eucharistical sacrifice, for a perpetual remembrance of his death and passion, to his second coming. And thus St. Augustine doth inform us, saying 
(p) Aug. de Civ. dei. l. 17. c. 2. , Id enim sacrificium est quod successit omnibus sacrificiis quae immolabantur in umbra futuri; that this one sacrifice succeedeth in the place of all those, which were offered in relation unto Christ to come. But before him St. Ireneus did more plainly affirm that same; who living in the next age to the Apostles, is able to instruct us better in the mysteries of the Christian faith, than any other more remote, and of less antiquity. And he tells us this, viz. that as God caused his Gospel to be preached over all the world, in stead of the innumerable ordinances of the Law of Moses: so he ordained that for those several sorts of sacrifices which are there prescribed 
(q) Iren. l. 4. c. 18. , simplex oblatio panis et vini sufficiat, the offering of bread and wine only should be held sufficient. More plainly yet, as plainly as he could express himself by words and writing, he doth thus deliver it, Sed & suis Discipulis dans consilium, etc. Christ, saith he 
(r) Ibid. c. 34. , giving his Disciples charge to offer the first fruits of every creature to the Lord their God, not that God standeth in need of their oblations, but that they might not be esteemed to be either unfruitful or ungrateful, took ordinary bread (eum qui ex natura panis est) and having given thanks said, This is my body; and taking the cup into his hands, such as we use to drink of the fruit of the vine, acknowledged it to be his blood. What then? for this we know already. It followeth, Et novi testamenti novam docuit oblationem, quam Ecclesia ab Apostolis accipiens in universo mundo offert Deo. By doing which (saith that old Father) he taught us the new sacrifice of oblation of the new Testament, which the Church receiving from the Apostles, doth offer unto God over all the world. So that the holy Eucharist was ordained by Christ, not only as a Sacrament, but a sacrifice also; and so esteemed and called by the most ancient writers, though many times by reason of several relations it hath either several names, or several adjuncts: that is to say, a sacrifice, a commemorative sacrifice, an eucharistical sacrifice, a spiritual sacrifice, the Supper of the Lord, a Sacrament. A sacrifice it is, and so called commonly, in reference unto the oblation or offering of the bread and wine, made unto God in testimony and due acknowledgement that all which we possess is received from him, and that we tender these his creatures to him as no longer ours, but to be his, and to be spent in such employments, and for such holy uses, as he shall please to put it to. In this respect it is entitled, Oblatio panis et vini, the offering or oblation of bread and wine, as before we saw from Irenaeus 
(s) Ibid. c. 18. ; the sacrifice offered by us Gentiles, (hostia quae ipsi a nobis Gentibus offertur) of the bread and wine presented in the holy Eucharist, as in justin Martyr 
(t) Iust. Mart. in dialog. ; Sacrificium panis & vini, the sacrifice (in plain terms) of bread and wine 
(u) Fulg. de fide ad Petrum. , as Fulgentius hath it. For clearing of which point we may please to know, that anciently it was the custom of the Primitive Christians, to bring their bread and wine to the Church of God, and offer them to the Lord by the hands of the Priest or Minister; part of the which was consecrated for the use of the Sacrament, the rest being usually given to the poor and needy, as having a letter of attorney from the Lord of heaven to receive our bounties. For thus we read in justin Martyr, who lived the next door also to the Apostles: Prayers being done (saith he) we salute one another with an holy kiss 
(x) Iust. Mart. Apolog. 2. .  
Then do we offer to the Bishop, (for such is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whom he speaks of there) bread and wine mixed with water, (as the use than was) which he receiving, offered to God the sacrifice of praise and glory, etc. And thus St. Cyprian speaking of a rich but covetous Widow, who came not with her offering to the Church as her poor neighbours did, charged her that she came into God's house without her sacrifice, and eat of that which had been offered (or sacrificed unto God, by far poorer folk 
(y) Cyp. se●m. de Ele●mosyna. . Locuples et dives, Dominicum celebrare te dicis (but there dominicum signifieth the Lord's day plainly) qui corbonam omnino non respicis; qui in dominicum (there it is the Church) sine sacrificio venis, qui partem de sacrificio quod pauper obtulit sumis, are his words at large. Where sacrificium in both places signifieth the bread and wine, which they used to offer to the Lord, to be consecrated and employed in celebrating the memorial of our Saviour's passion. It is called next a commemorative sacrifice, (a Sacrifice commemorative and representative by Dr. Morton 
(x) Of the Sament. l. 6. c 5.  Ld. B. of Durham in his book of the Sacrament) in regard that it was instituted by our Saviour Christ, for a perpetual memory of that one perfect and all-sufficient sacrifice, which he offered of himself upon the Crosse. And to this end it was that chrysostom having called the Sacrament of the Lords supper by the name of a Sacrifice; adds presently, not by way of correction or retractation, (as I know some think) but by way of explanation only 
(a) Chrysost. in Heb. 9 ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that it was the remembrance rather of a sacrifice, or a commemorative sacrifice as some others call it 
(b) Chem. Exa. conc. Trid. par. 2. . Which word commemorative, as I take it, detracts not from the nature of a sacrifice, (as if it were the less a sacrifice because commemorative) but only signifieth the end to which it is specially directed. For as the sacrifices of the old law were true and proper sacrifices in respect of the beasts or fowls, or other things which were offered, although prefigurative of that sacrifice made upon the Cross, which was then to come: so are the sacrifices of the Gospel true and real sacrifices, in reference to the oblation made of bread and wine for the service of God, although commemorative of the same great sacrifice now already past. It was called thirdly a spiritual and Eucharistical sacrifice, by reason that God's servants therein make profession of their due acknowledgements for all the blessings which he hath vouchsafed to bestow on their souls and bodies, especially for the redemption of themselves and of all mankind by the death of Christ; and therewith offering up themselves, their souls and bodies, as a pleasing and most acceptable sacrifice to the Lord their God. For thus we find in justin Martyr, that the Bishop or Precedent of the Congregation having received the bread and wine from the hands of the faithful, offered, by them 
(c) Iust. Mart. Apolog. 2. , the sacrifice of praise and thanks to God the Father of all things in the name of the Son and the holy Ghost, for all those blessings which he hath graciously from time to time bestowed upon them. And thus Irenaeus 
(d) Iren. advers. ●aeres. l. 1. c. 34. , Oportet nos oblationem Deo facere, et in omnibus gratos inveniri fabricatori Deo, etc. It becometh us (saith he) to make oblations unto God, and to be thankful in all things to our heavenly maker, offering to him the first fruits of his own creatures, with a right belief, and faith without hypocrisy, in hope assured, and fervency of brotherly affection: which pure oblation, the Church alone doth offer to the maker of all things, out of his own creatures, with praise and thanksgiving. And last of all, it is called the Sacrament, sometimes the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, sometimes the Sacrament of the Altar 
(e) Aug. de Civ. dei. l. 10. c. 6. & alii. , by reaso that the bread and wine thus dedicated to the service of Almighty God, and rightly consecrated by his Ministers, are made unto the faithful receiver the very body and blood of Christ our Saviour, and do exhibit to us all the benefits of his death and passion. Of which it is thus said by the old Father Irenaeus, that the bread made of the fruits of the earth, and sanctified according to Christ's ordinance 
(f) Iren. adv. haeres. l. 1. c. 34. , jam non communis panis est, sed Eucharistia ex duabus rebus constans, terrena & Coelesti, etc. is now no longer common bread, but the blessed Eucharist, consisting of two parts, the one earthly, and the other heavenly: that is to say, the outward elemental sign, and the inward and spiritual grace. In which respect it was affirmed of this bread; by Cyprian, (if at the least the work be his, which is somewhat doubted) non effigie sed natura mutatum 
(g) Cyprian de coena Domini. , that though it kept the same shape which it had before, yet was the nature of it changed: not that it ceased to be what before it was, (as the Patrons of the Romish Mass 
(h) Bell. de Missa.  do pervert his meaning) but by being what before it was not: just as an iron made red hot, retaineth the proportion and dimensions which before it had, and is still iron as at the first, though somewhat of the nature of fire, which is to warm, and burn, be now added to it. And this was anciently the doctrine of the Church of Christ touching the sacrifice of the Lords supper, or the blessed Eucharist, before that monstrous Paradox of Transubstantiation was hammered in the brains of capricious Schoolmen; or any such thing as a Propitiatory sacrifice for the quick and dead, affabulated to the same by the Popes of Rome. Now such a sacrifice as this, with all the several kinds and adjuncts of it, we find asserted and maintained by the Church of England: though it condemn the sacrifices of the Masses 
(l) Articles of 1562. Art. 31.28. , in which it was commonly said, that the Priest did offer Christ for the quick and the dead, to have remission of pain or guilt, as dangerous deceits and blasphemous fables, and censureth Transubstantiation as repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, destructive of the true nature of a Sacrament, and to have given occasion to much superstition. For if a true and proper sacrifice be defined to be the offering of a creature to Almighty God, to be consecrated by a lawful Minister, to be spent and consumed to his service; as Bellarmine, and the most learned men of both sides do affirm it is; then is the offering of the bread and wine in the Church of England a true proper sacrifice: for it is usually provided by the Churchwardens at the charge of the people 
(m) Rubric after the Communion. , and being by them presented in the name of the people, and placed on the Altar or holy table before the Lord, is now no longer theirs, but his; (and grant that we receiving these thy creatures of bread and wine) and being consecrated by the Priest, is consumed and eaten by such as come prepared to partake thereof. The whole prayer used at the consecration, doth it not plainly manifest that it is commemorative, and celebrated in memorial of that full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction for the sins of the whole world, which our Saviour made upon the Cross, for our Redemption? And when the Priest or Minister doth call upon us in the Exhortation, above all things to give most humble and hearty thanks to God the Father, the Son, and the holy Ghost, for the redemption of the world by the death and passion of our Saviour Christ: and that we do accordingly entirely desire his fatherly goodness, mercifully to accept that our sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving; and therewith offer and present unto him ourselves, souls, and bodies, to be a reasonable, holy, and lively sacrifice unto him; do we not thereby signify as plainly as may be, that it is an Eucharistical and spiritual sacrifice? Finally, that it is a Sacrament, I think none denies; and that thereby we are partakers of the body and blood of CHRIST, I think all will grant; the people giving thanks to Almighty God, for that he hath vouchsafed to feed them with the spiritual food of the most precious body and blood of his Son our Saviour Jesus Christ; and calling upon him to grant, that by the merits and death of his Son Christ Jesus, and through faith in his blood, both they and all his whole Church may obtain remission of their sins, and all other benefits of his passion 
(n) Prayer after the Participation. . Nor doth the Church of England differ from the Ancients as concerning the change, made in the bread and wine on the consecration: which being blessed and received according to Christ's holy institution, become the very body and blood of Christ, by that name are delivered with the usual prayer, into the hands of the people, and are verily and indeed (saith the public authorized Catechism) taken and received of the faithful in the Lord's Supper. The bread and wine, though still the same in substance which before they were, are changed in nature, being made what before they were not: according to the uncorrupted doctrine of the purest times, and the opinion of the soundest and most learned Protestants. I add no more, but that if question should be asked with which of all the legal sacrifices this of the Church of Christ doth hold best proportion: I answer that it it best agreeth with those Eucharistical sacrifices of the Law which were called peace-offerings, made unto God upon their reconciliation and atonement with him. In which as the creature offered a sacrifice to the Lord their God, might be indifferently either male or female, to show that both sexes might participate of it; so being offered to the Lord, the one part of it did belong to the Priest towards his maintenance and support, as the skin, the belly, the right shoulder, and the breast, etc. the rest was eaten in the way of a solemn feast, by those who brought it for an offering before the Lord. And in the feast, as Mollerus 
(o) Moller. in Psal. 116.  very probably conjectureth, the man that brought this offering did use to take a cup of wine and give thanks over it to the Lord for all his benefits: which was the Calix salutis whereof the Psalmist speaketh, saying, I will take the cup of salvation, and ●all upon the name of the Lord, Psalm. 116.13. But I crave pardon for this digression (if at least it be one) and pass from the commemoration to the thing remembered.  
To return back therefore unto Christ our Saviour, whom we left hanging on the Cross; and who by yielding up his soul into the hands of his Father, had put a final period unto all his sufferings: it could not be, but that his death being of so great consequence to the sons of men, though most unjustly brought about by these sons of Belial) must be accompanied with some great and signal testimonies from the God of heaven. And so accordingly it was. For the text telleth us 
(m) Mat. 27.45, 51. , that the sun was darkened from the sixth hour to the nineth, that the vail of the Temple was rend in twain from the top to the bottom, and the earth did quake, and the rocks were rend. It could not otherwise be supposed, but that the whole fabric of the world would be out of joint, and the course of nature suffer interruption, when he by whom the world was made, and nature put into an ordinary course, did suffer such a dissolution of his body and soul, and took his farewell of the world in so strange a manner. Which wondrous accidents, together with the circumstances of the time and place, being so necessary to the knowledge of our Saviour's passion, and to the clearing of some difficulties which occur therein; shall be a little further enquired into, for the reader's satisfaction and mine one. And first beginning with those signs and wonders which did accompany his death; some of them were so general, as to be observed in parts far remote, and by men that had no reference unto Christ's affairs; and other being of more private and particular nature, not taking notice of but by those of jewry, whom it most principally concerned. Of this last sort was the renting of the vail of the Temple in twain from the top to the bottom. Concerning which we may please to know that the Temple of Jerusalem consisted of two parts (besides the Courts) that is to say, the body of the Church, which they called the holy, and the choir or chancel of the same, which they called the Sanctum sanctorum, or the holy of holies, or the holiest of all, Heb. 9.3. into which none might enter but the high Priest only, and that but once a year neither 
(n) Heb. 9.7. , when he made offerings for himself and for the errors of the people. This parted from the other by a very high wall reaching to the top, and glittering with gold, and curiously engraved with the work of the carver 
(o) joseph. de bell● jud. l. 6. c. 6. : having one only door which opened inwardly into it, before which hung the vail here mentioned, (being made of silk and artificially embroidered with most curious works) to hinder the people from looking into the inmost Sanctuary of the Temple. Now for the renting of this vail, it either signified the discovery and laying open of the jewish rites, which before were hidden and concealed from the eyes of the Gentiles 
(p) Theop. in Mat. 27. , as Theophylact is of opinion; or the abrogation of the jewish ceremonies, by the death of Christ, as Calvin thinks; or rather the breaking down of the partition-wall by which the jews and Gentiles had before been separated, and bringing both into one Church or Mystical body. And unto this, most probably alludeth the Apostle 
(q) Eph. 2.14, 16. , saying of Christ, that he hath made of both one, and hath broken down 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that middle wall of partition which was between us, that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the Crosse. As for the earthquake, and that darkness which the speaks of, it was so general and remarkable over all the world, that other writers of those times have observed the same, and left their observations on record to confirm those truths; left the Evangelists might have been suspected to have been partial in relating the affairs of Christ. For Origen proves it out of Phlegon, an old Greek writer of those times, that in the reign of Tiberius Caesar under whom Christ suffered 
(r) Orig. contr. Celsium. l 2. , universum orbem tenebris offusum, the whole world was covered with a prodigious darkness, and that many fatal earthquakes happened in the same times also. Eusebius doth observe the same out of Phlegon also 
(s) Euseb. in Chronice. , adding withal, that the sun never suffered such a notable defect of light, as was then observed; and that many Cities of Bythinia, but specially the City of Nice, were miserably shaken with those earthquakes. Tertullian also speaking of this present Eclipse, builds not alone on the Evangelists (whose credit he conceived the Gentiles would not much rely on) but doth appeal to the Records and Archives of the Roman Empire 
(t) Tertull. in Apologet. c. 21. . A darkness or eclipse the more remarkable, because so plainly contrary to the course of nature, and therefore by St. Augustine called mirabilis et prodigtosus 
(u) Aug. Epist. 80. ad Hesych. , as being at the full of the Moon (for at that time the jews did keep the feast of the Passeover) whereas all Eclipses of the sun do naturally happen in the wane of the old moon, or the first quarter of the new.  
Touching the time of our Redeemers being fastened to the fatal Cross, there seems to be some difference between the Evangelists. St. Mark saith, It was the third hour, and they crucified him; Mark. 15.25 St. john, that it was about the sixth hour when Palate delivered him unto them to be crucified, cap. 16. v. 14, 16. This hath occasioned some to think that the text in one of the Evangelists hath received a change, and that the Copies differ from the first original. The Commentaries on the 77. Psal. ascribed to Hierome 
(x) Hier. in Psal. 77. , is of opinion that the text in Mark hath been corrupted by the carelessness of the Transcribers, and the third hour put down in stead of the sixth; and hereunto Cajetan on the place, Sixtus Senensis Biblioth. l. 6. Annotat. 131. and Canus in the second of ●is Common places, cap. 18. do conform their judgements. And on the other side Theophylact is of opinion that the corruption lieth in the text of john, which anciently had spoken of the third hour 
(y) Theop. in johan.  in numeral figures not at length, and that by the like fault of the transcribers, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as his own words are, the numeral figures were mistaken, the sixth being there put down in stead of the third. And though it cannot be denied but that some very ancient Copies do read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there as it is in Mark: yet Beza 
(z) Beza Annot. in Mar. , who observes and approveth the same, thinks it very unsafe to alter any thing in the text, or depart only upon that authority from the usual readings; with great both piety and prudence. So that the readings in both places (as they stand now in our Bibles) being very ancient and extant in all the Fathers who have written on them or otherwise discoursed occasionally of our Saviour's passion: it hath exceedingly exercised the wits of judicious men, to atone the difference. The general resolution is 
(a) Lud. de Ten. Isagoge sacra. difficult. 6. §. 5. , (for this is neither time nor place to discuss it fully) that the whole day amongst the jews from sun to sun (which the Astronomers call the artificial day) was commonly divided into four quaternions of hours; of which the first three had the name of the third hour, the second three of the sixth hour, the third three of the ninth hour, and the last three of the evening or sun set: Then, that the sixth hour beginning where the third did end, the same thing may be said to be done in the end of the third hour, which was done in the beginning of the sixth; inchoative in the sixth hour, but completive in the third. And so our Saviour may be said to be crucified in the third hour as St. Mark relateth, that is to say, in the end of the third hour complete; and about the sixth hour, as St. john delivereth it, that is to say, about the sixth hour coming on. Others conceive that Mark relates unto the time when Pilate did pass sentence on him, and deliver him over to be crucified, which was in the third hour of the day; and that john speaks as to the execution of the sentence, which was done in the sixth. And if this could agree with the other cicumstances it were undoubtedly the best, and of most probability, especially considering what good ground it hath from Ignatius 
(b) Ignat. in Epist. ad Trall.  who lived in the times of the Apostles. By whom the whole story of the Passion is thus distributed.  
In the third hour Christ was condemned by Pontius Pilate, crucified in the sixth, died in the nin●h, and was buried before sunset. And unto either of these two I should sooner yield, then harken to the new devise of Daniel Heinsius, who will have the third hour mentioned in St. Marks Gospel to be the third hour of our Saviour's crucifying 
(c) Heinsius Exercitat. sacrae in Mar. c. 6. , with which the circumstances of the text can no way agree: and yet far sooner unto him, then to an eminent Divine of great place and name, affirming openly in a Sermon before the King (on the credit of some old Greek copies) that the text in john had been corrupted. Less difficulty far there is about the place of the Passion, in which all Evangelists do agree in meaning, though they use divers words. St. Matthew, Mark, and john, do call it Golgatha, according to the Hebrew name, but St. Luke calls it Calvarie, 23.33. according to that Hebrew name translated and made intelligible to the ears of the Romans. In every one it signifieth the place of a skull, and is so translated in our Bibles, Matth. 27.33. Mark 15.22. joh 19.17. A name bestowed upon it as the Fathers say, in regard that Adam was there buried, and his skull found there by the people many Ages after. And though I dare not swear this for a Canonical truth, yet certainly it hath as good grounds to stand upon, as an old Tradition can confer. For sure I am that such a Tradition there was in the time of Origen, one of the most ancient Christian writers, whose works are extant. 
(d) Origen. in Mat. tract. 35.  Venit ad me talis traditio, quod corpus Adae primi hominis sepultum est ibi, ubi crucifixus est Christus. There is a Tradition, saith he, that the body of the first man Adam was there buried, where Christ was crucified. Tertullian doth affirm the same amongst his verses. So doth St. Basil also on Levit. 5. Epiphanius contra haereses, n. 46. Chrysostom in his 84. Homily on john: St. Augustine in the 71. Sermon inscribed de Tempore: St. Ambrose Epistola 3. lib. 5. Hierom on Matth. 27. Theophylact in his Comments on the four Evangelists. Nor do they only thus unanimously report the said Tradition, but they give their reason for it too, viz. that because all men died in Adam, so by Christ all might be also made alive; that so where sin took its beginning, it should find destruction; and finally that ut super Adae tumulum sanguis Christi stillaret 
(e) Hierony. in Matth 27. , which was Hieroms conceit, that so the blood of Christ might fall upon Adam's tomb. And I remember I have seen a picture in an old piece of hanging in the stalls at Westminster (for we have our Testes fenestras too, especially in such a case as this, as well as Campian 
(f) Campian in Ratione 10.  in a greater,) in which we find the soldier piercing Christ's side with his lance; water and blood issuing from the side ●o pierced; and Adam starting out of his grave with a cup in his hand to receive the blood. Which fancy as it was conform to the old Tradition, so did it hand somely express a good piece of Divinity: the meaning of it being this, that as Adam being the root of all mankind had forfeited for himself and his posterity all those most excellent endowments of grace and nature, which God had given him at the first; so now he did lay hold upon Salvation for himself and his, that all who were, and were to be descended of him, should have their part in the redemption of the World by the blood of Christ And this I call a piece of good Divinity, howsoever expressed; by reason that the universality of Redemption by our Saviour's death, was not alone the Doctrine of the Primitive times; but is the genuine and confirmed doctrine of this Church of England, which teacheth us to pray unto God the Son 
(g) In the Litany. , as the Redeemer of the world, and every one of us to believe in the same God the Son, who hath redeemed me and all mankind 
(h) In the Catechism. ; and finally to pray to God to have mercy upon all men, even upon all jews, Turks, Infidels, and Heretics 
(i) Collect on Good Friday. , that they may all be saved amongst the remnant of true Israelites, and be made one fold under the same one Shepherd JESUS CHRIST our Lord. No truth more rightly stated, more piously applied, nor more fully explicated.  
It is now time we lay our Saviour in his Grave, being the last degree of his humiliation; taking along with us such preparatives, as lead unto the same in the holy Gospel, in which the first passage which we meet with, is, how some devout people repaired to Pilate, and begged the body of their Lord that they might entomb it: 
(k) Luk. 23.50.53.  others in reference to the great festival ensuing, had desired of him that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away 
(l) Joh. 19.31. , to the end that their bodies might not remain upon the Cross on the Sabbath-day. Which suit being granted, and that the soldiers coming to Christ found him dead already, they omitted the breaking of his legs, (for so had God disposed, who before had signified, that a bone of him should not be broken) but yet to make sure work, it seemed good to one of them to pierce his side with a spear; and forthwith (saith the Text) came out blood and water, joh. 19.34. On this St. Augustine makes this gloss, that by the blood and water issuing from the side of CHRIST, we are to understand the two Sacraments of Baptism and the Lords Supper, commanded and ordained by him 
(m) August. in joh. tract. 15. . De latere pendentis in Cruse, Lancen percusso, Sacramenta Ecclesiae profluxerunt, as his words are briefly: and hereunto the Fathers and most writers since have inclined generally. This was the last remarkable thing remembered in our Saviour's passion; the draining of his blood to the last drop as it were, which though it could not yet add to his former sufferings, being dead before: yet served it as a confirmation of his death in the eyes of those, who otherwise might have called the realty thereof in question; and was a certain note to discern him by, after he was risen again from death to life, as in the story of St. Thomas 
(n) Joh. 20.25. . No further difficulty, that I know of, doth occur in this: the pleading of this Text by the Canonists of the Church of Rome 
(o) Durand. in Ration. Divin. , in maintenance of their mingling water with the wine, in the blessed Sacrament, being so silly a device, that it deserves not to be honoured with a confutation. But in the other passage, which the Gospel mentioneth, touching the not breaking of his bones, perhaps a question may be made by some captious men, how it can possibly agree with another text of holy Scripture, where it is said, This is my body 
(p) 1 Cor. 11.24.  which is broken for you; and to what use the breaking of the bread doth serve in the holy Eucharist, it not to signify the breaking of our Saviour's body? But the answer unto this is easy. For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the word used by St. Paul in the Original, doth not only signify to break in pieces, though Rob. Stephanus in his Thesaurus expound the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by no other word than the Latin Frango. Sometimes it signifieth to strain, as in that of Aristotle 
(q) Aristot. Probl. sect. 5. num. 19 , going up an hill 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the knees are bend or strained backwards; and in that also of Hypocrates 
(r) Hippocr. l. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. , where he observeth that sometimes in holding the hand forth outright, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the bowing of the joint (or elbow) is strained. Sometimes it signifieth to cut, Hesychius 
(s) Hesych. in Lexico. in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. , an old Grammarian, expounding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is cut; and Theophrastus calling the cuttings of vines 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(t) De causis Plant. l. 3. c. 19 : with whom Suidas, Phavorinus, and the Scholiast on Aristophanes do agree also. And in this sense the bread is broken in the Sacrament, although cut with knives; there being mention of a sacred knife in St. Chrysostoms' Liturgy, which was employed unto no other use then that of the holy Sacrament. And last of all it signifieth sometimes the tearing or bruising of the fleshy parts, when the bones are neither broken nor so much as touched: which is most clearly witnessed by Hypocrates the Father of all learned Physic, giving this for a Rule of Art, that the breaking of any of the bones is less dangerous, then where the bones are not broken, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(u) Hippocrat. l. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. , but the veins and sinews adjoining are on every side bruised. So that although the bones of our Saviour were not broken, (that he might in all things be agreeable to the Paschal lamb) yet were his joints strained to the utmost, when he was stretched upon the Cross, his flesh most cruelly cut and torn with scourges, his veins and sinews miserably bruised and broken with those outward torments. All which as they are signified by this one word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which we render broken; so doth it very well agree with that meaning of the word broken in our Engish Idiom: As when we say, a man hath got a broken skin, or broken head, when the flesh is only bruised, and the skin but razed. And hereto Beza doth agree in his Annotations on that Text 
(x) Beza. Annot. in 1 Cor. 11. .  
By the word broken in St. Paul, is designed (saith he) the very manner of Christ's death; his body being torn, bruised, and even broken with most cruel torments, though his legs were not broken as the thiefs were: so that the word hath a marvellous express signification, making the figure to agree so fully with the thing itself, the breaking of the bread representing to us the very death and passion of our Saviour Christ.  
Now go we on, pilate's leave being thus obtained, and the certainty of Christ's death assured by this second murder; they hasten all they could unto his funeral: to which was used small preparation, but less pomp by far. It was the day of preparation to the following festival, as two 
(y) Luk. 23.54. & Joh. 19.14.  of the Evangelists do affirm expressly; the Friday, or good Friday as we call it now: in which it was not lawful for the jews to do any work. A garden there was hard at hand, and in the garden a new sepulchre, in which never man was laid before: a Virgin-sepulchre for the son of a Virgin-mother; a Garden to receive that great pledge of death which first found entrance by a Garden. So that the labour was not much to take down his body, and carry it to the next spot of ground, and there entomb it. No further cost bestowed upon his funerals, who spared not his most precious blood to procure our happiness; but a mixture made of Myrrh and Aloes: and had not Nicodemus been more valiant now 
(z) Joh. 19 39 , then when he used to come unto his Saviour, as it were by stealth, he had wanted that. And this was done after the custom of the jews, whose manner it was to bestow that charge upon their dead; in sign of their belief of the Resurrection unto life eternal: not out of any thought they had of his so speedy a Resurrection at the three days end, though he had often told them that he would so do. So far were they from looking to behold him again on the first day of the week then following, that they did all they could to lay him up fast enough till the day of judgement: and to that end not only wrapped him up in cerecloths, (for such the linen clothes were which they wrapped him in, joh. 19.40.) but rolled a great stone to the door of the sepulchre 
(a) Mat. 27.60. , to make sure work with him. God certainly had so disposed it in his infinite wisdom to make the miracle of his Resurrection, the more considerable and convincing both with jews and Gentiles. This is the sum of those particulars that concern Christ's burial. Which though it seem of no more moment, then as a confirmation of an unfeigned death, and a preparative to his Resurrection; and consequently may be thought unnecessary to be here added in the Creed: yet upon further search into it, we shall find it otherwise. Our Saviour had not overcome death, if he had not died; nor got the victory of the grave, had he not been buried. His being restored unto life within three days of his death, was a very great and signal miracle; but not so great, as that which had been acted before on Lazarus 
(b) Joh. 11.39. , who had lain four days in the earth, and began to putrefy. His lying in the grave was the way to bury it: the only means to weaken and unloose the bonds thereof, that it should be no more a Prison, but a place of rest, wherein the bodies of God's servants were to wait his pleasure, in sure and certain hope of a Resurrection to eternal life. But there was more in it yet then so. The adding of these two words, and buried, seem unto me to have been done by the spirit of Prophecy; for the preserving of a great part of the following Article; which else had been in danger in these quarrel some times, to be lost for ever. Great pains is taken by some men, and those of eminent parts and reputation, to prove that nothing else is meant by Christ's descent into hell; but either his lying 
(c) Bucer in Matth. 27.  in the sepulchre, or being made subject to the ignominy of the grave 
(d) Olevian ap. B. Bilson. p. 651. , or his continuance for a while in the state of death 
(e) B. Usher in his answer to the Jesuits challenge. ; as we shall see at large in the chapter following: all which are fully comprehended in these words, and buried. What an advantage think we would these men have taken, to put their own erroneous sense upon that Article, had these words been wanting; who have presumed to advance their own particular fancies above the Catholic Tradition of the Church of Christ, notwithstanding these two words stand still, to confute them in it? But of this anon. All I shall add unto these Observations on Christ's death, and burial, and his continuance in the grave, is, that in memory thereof, the Church hath anciently appointed that Friday and Saturday should be fasted weekly, the one in memory of the death and passion of our Lord CHRIST JESUS, who on that day suffered for our sins; the other in relation to the woeful and disconsolate condition of the first followers of our Saviour, who all that day distracted (between hope and fear) did seem to fit in darkness and the shadow of death 
(g) Platina in viz. Innocent. . And though the first Christians of the East did not fast the Saturday, for fear of giving scandal to the jews amongst whom they lived: yet they made up the number of two days in the week, by adding Wednesday to the Friday 
(h) Ignat. Epist. ad Philipp. & Can. Apost. 69. ; that being conceived to be the day, on which he had been bought and sold by the Traitor judas. But that concerns not us of the Western Churches in which the Friday and the Saturday fast are of such antiquity, that it is generally believed by all moderate men, to be derived from Apostolical Tradition. Certain I am, there is as much authority to keep those days fasting, as the Canons of the Church can give them; and the Statutes of this Realm 
(i) 5 & 6 Ed. 6. cap. 3.  can add to those ancient Canons: and were accordingly observed by all Christian men, till these wretched times, in which the sons of the old Heretic Arius, have turned all order out of doors, and introduced a most unchristian or rather Antichristian licentiousness, under the colour and pretence of Christian liberty.  
Thus have we brought our Saviour CHRIST unto the bottom of the grave, the lowest step of his humiliation for the sons of men; for lower than the grave he could hardly go. And here we should conclude this Article, but that as we began with some Observations touching Pontius Pilate, under whom Christ suffered, as also touching Annas and Caiaphas the High Priests, two of the principal actors in this happy Tragedy: so we will close this Article with the relation of that fearful and calamitous end which did most justly fall upon them, and on the rest of their accomplices in this act of blood. But first we will begin with judas, the Architect and chief contriver of the the plot: of whom it is recorded in the holy Scriptures, that being touched in conscience for so foul a treachery as the betraying of the innocent blood of his Lord and Master, he brought back his money to the Chief Priests and Elders, and finding that they would not take it, threw it down in the Temple, & went out and hanged himself 
(l) Matth. 27.3, 4, 5. . S. Matthew there leavs off the story, unto which Luke adds, that falling headlong 
(m) Act. 1.18.  from the tree, (whether by the breaking of the rope, or by some other way, that the Scriptures say not) he burst asunder in the midst and all his bowels gushed out. And certainly it was but just, that he should lose his bowels, who had so long before lost his compassion. If now a man should ask what death judas died, St. Matthew would make answer, that he hanged himself; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, saith the Greek, & abiens laqueo se suspendit, as the Latin hath it. Which words lest they should seem of a doubtful sense, and not import as much as the English makes them; we will see what is noted of them by the Ancient Fathers. And first St. Hierom is express for this, that judas laid violent hands upon himself, and was the Author of his own death; adding self-murder to the heap of his former crimes. Ad prius scelus proprii homicidii crimen addidit 
(n) Hieronym. in Matth. 27. ; so that Father hath it. St. Augustine goeth more particularly to work, Et laqueo vitam finivit 
(o) Aug. quaest. No. Test. c. 4. , and tells us in plain terms that he hanged himself. The Translator of Chrysostom doth affirm the same, saying, Projecta in Templo pecunia abiit, & gulam laqueo fregit, 
(p) Chrysostom in Matth. 27.  that throwing down the wages of his iniquity upon the pavement of the Temple, he went out, and broke his neck with an halter; which is the same with that of Augustine, though in other terms. And finally Theophylact, (though many others might be named) who doubtless understood his own language well, doth resolve it thus; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(q) Theophyl. in Matth. 27. , etc. that putting his neck into the noose which himself had made, he fell violently from off the tree, and so burst asunder in the midst. The general tradition of the Church doth run this way also. Nor had I took this pains in a case so clear, but that I see the Fathers put to school again by our modern Critics; who will not have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signify, that he hanged himself 
(r) Heinsius in No. Test. Mat. c. 21. , but that he fell into such an extremity of grief, with remorse of conscience, that the anguish of it stopped his breath, so that falling flat upon the ground he broke asunder in the middle. A death so much too good for so vile a Traitor, and so improbable, if not impossible in the last part of it; that he is fain to bring in the Devil 
(s) Id. in Act. c. 1. , (Diabolo operante) to pull out his bowels. But of this new devise enough, look we next on Pilate; who having so unjustly condemned the Innocent, and drawn upon himself the vengeance of a most just Judge; was not long after outed of his Government by L. Vitellius Lord Precedent of Syria, and sent back to Rome 
(t) joseph. Antiq. jud. l. 18. c. 5. . Where being come, so many grievous complaints were made against him to the Senate, that he was banished to Vienna, a City of France. The Roman Legends do relate that he was prosecuted at Rome by Veronica (of whom they fable that our Saviour going to his Passion, gave her the print of his face in a linen cloth) for the death of Christ; but the Greek Legends do ascribe this prosecution unto Mary Magdalen (as being of more credit in those parts): and both true alike. Certain it is, that in his hasty proceedings against CHRIST our Saviour, he had most wilfully broke an Edict of Tiberius, the than Roman Emperor; by whom it was decreed, Vt supplicia damnatorum in decimum usque diem differrentur, as Suetonius hath it 
(u) Suetonius in Tiber. c. 75. ; that the execution of the sentence upon men condemned should be deferred till the tenth day. But I find not this laid unto his charge. He had guilt enough besides of more public nature, than the murder of one innocent person: josephus telling of a great slaughter which he made of the Samaritans a little before his calling home 
(x) joseph. Antiq. jud. l. 18.4. ; and Philo accusing him to Caius of rapine, bribery, oppression, many cruel murders of men uncondemned 
(y) Philo de Legatione ad Caium. ; which were the things most likely to procure his banishment. Nor could he live long quiet at Vienna neither; the vengeance of the Lord still following after him, his guilty conscience still condemning, and Caius Caligula the Roman Emperor putting so many indignities upon him: that he thought best to rid himself at once out of all his troubles, and so slew himself; as both Eusebius 
(z) Euseb. hist. Eccl. l. 2. cap. 7.  and Orosius 
(a) Oros. l. 7. c. 5.  do report the story. For Caiaphas next, josephus telleth us that he was deprived of the high Priesthood by the same Vitellius 
(b) joseph. de bello jud. l. 18. c. 6. , who removed Pilate from his Government: the infamy and disgrace of which deprivation did so work upon him, that he grew weary of his life, and at last laid violent hands on himself also, to save the Executioner a labour, as we read in Clemens 
(c) Constitut. Apostol. l. 8. c. 1. . The like foul ends befell Annas, together with the rest of the Chief Priests, and Scribes, and Pharisees, who had an hand in the conspiracy against our Saviour; of whom Nicephorus tells us, but in general only, Quod & ipsi dignas variasque dederunt poenas 
(d) Niceph. histor. Eccl. l▪ 2. cap. 10. , that they all came to just but miserable deaths, as the wickedness of the fact deserved. As for the whole Nation of the jews, who were so bend upon the death of their Messiah, that they cried aloud, his blood be upon us and our children 
(e) Mat. 27.25. , what a miserable destruction fell upon them very shortly after, and how they have been hunted since from one place to another, is a thing so well known, that I need not tell it. All I shall note, is this particular passage of the Divine justice, that they who bought their Saviour for thirty pieces of silver, were themselves sold at thirty for one piece of silver, in the open Market. A true, but a most wonderful character of the finger of God. And so I leave them to God's mercy, and proceed unto the following Article.    

ARTICLE VI Of the sixth ARTICLE OF THE CREED Ascribed to St. THOMAS. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. i e. Descendit ad inferos; tertia die resurrexit a mortuis. i e. He descended into Hell; the third day he rose again from the dead.  

CHAP. VIII. Of the local descent of Christ into hell. Hades and inferi what they signify in the best Greek and Latin Authors; and in the text of holy Scripture. An examination and confutation of the contrary opinions.  
WE made an end of the Humiliation of our Lord Jesus Christ, in the former Chapter; for to a lower condition then that of the ignominy of the grave, we could not possibly expect that he should be brought. We must next look upon his exaltation, the first degree or step to which, was his descent into hell. But this perhaps may seem to some to be a very strange kind of preferment, a point so far from being any part of his exaltation, that it may worthily be accounted his very lowest degree of humiliation, a fall far lower than the Grave. And so it had been out of doubt, had he descended down to hell to have felt the pains of it, or to have been tormented though but for a moment in the flames thereof. 'tis not the place but the intent, not the descending but the business which he went about which makes the difference in this case▪ and the intent and purpose of his going thither was to begin his triumph over Satan and all his Angels, to beat the Devil in his own strongest hold and fortress, and take possession of that part of his kingdom, whereof God had given the keys unto him. And to descend on such a business, is I presume no matter of humiliation Doth not the Scripture tell us in another place, that the Lord himself shall descend from heaven 
(a) 1 Thess. 4.16.  with a shout, with the voice of the Archangel, and with the trumpet of God, when he comes to judge the quick and the dead? yet that descent of his upon that occasion, will be the highest step of his exaltation, there's no doubt of that. To descend then, is no humiliation of and in itself, but in relation to the business we descend about. And the intent or purpose of his descent was, to spoil principalities and powers 
(c) Col. 2.15. , (that is to say, the Prince of the world, and the powers of darkness) and having spoilt them to make a show of them openly, and triumph over them: to show himself unto the Devils and infernal spirits, and to receive the homage of the knee from them, as his slaves and vassals; that being reckoned as a part of his exaltation, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow 
(d) Phil. 2.10. , as well of things under the earth, as either of things upon the earth, or the things in heaven. To this the Fathers do attest, and some Counsels also; some of which shall be here produced. Our Saviour Christ had power, saith Athanasius 
(e) Athan. de incarn. Christ. , to show incorruption in the grave, and in his descent to hell to dissolve death, and proclaim resurrection unto all. St. Cyprian thus 
(f) Cyp. de Passione Christ. , When by the presence of Christ hell was broken open, and the captivity made captive, his conquering soul being presented to the sight of his. Father, returned again unto his body without delay. St. Augustine more plainly yet, Reddunt inferna victorem, etc. 
(g) Aug. Sermon. 138.131.  Hell returned back again her Conqueror; and whiles his body lay in the grave, his soul triumphed over hell. And finally thus the fourth Council of Toledo, CHRIST (say the Fathers there assembled) descended to hell 
(h) Concil. Tolet. 4. c. 10. , & devicto mortis imperio, and having subdued the kingdom of death, rose again the third day. More testimonies to this purpose might be here produced, but that they are reserved to another place, when we shall come to speak of those particular motives which did induce our Saviour to make this descent; and of the benefits redounding to the Church thereby. These are enough to let us see that his descending into hell, is to be reckoned as a part of his exaltation; which was the matter to be proved. To which we shall make ●old to add this one reason more, that is to say, that not only in that Sermon of St. Augustine's before alleged in the beginning of this Tractate; but also in Innocentius 
(i) Innocent. de Missa. l. 2. c. 50. , De Mysterio Missae, and Durandus his Rationale Divinorum 
(k) Dur. Rat. l. 4. de Symb. , this clause of his descent is joined together with that of his Resurrection, to make one Article between them: which certainly had not been joined together in this manner; but that they were both taken to be parts or steps of his exaltation, whereof this the first, and leading the way unto the rest.  
Now in our Observations on this Article we will take this course. First, we will look on the quid nominis, what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek, and inferi or infernum in the Latin, are said to signify in the best and approved Authors: Secondly, what the place or places are which are described under these names, not only amongst the Heathen, but the best Christian writers; which is the quid rei, of the business: Thirdly, we will show what is conceived to be the true meaning of the Article, according to the Catholic exposition of the ancient Fathers. Which done we will proceed unto the examination and confutation of all such contrary opinions as have been raised against the doctrine of the Primitive Church, and the established doctrine of this Church of England, (which herein as in other things, doth tread most punctually in the steps of the Ancient Fathers); with answer unto such objections as are made against it. And first for the Quid nominis of the Greek word Hades. St. Augustine gives this Etymology of the name, that it is called Hades, ex eo quod nihil suave habeat 
(l) Aug. in Proem. l. 3. de. Trin. , because there is nothing pleasant in it; and then must be derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 privative and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which signifieth sweet or pleasing. And unto this agreeth Eustathius the learned Scholiast on Homer, who saith that many derived Hades without contraction, and did not subscribe iota under it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(m) Eutath. in Homer Iliad. 1. , but affirmed it to be derived from Hedo, by a kind of Antiphrasis, because no man delighteth or rejoiceth in it. Hesychius also the great Grammarian witnesseth, that Ades in the Greek (without its aspirat) doth signify 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, unsweet or unpleasant 
(n) Hes. Lexic. in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. , and hath its aspiration from the Attic, not the Common Greek. Others derive it from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is to say, a Place where nothing can be seen for want of light, a place of darkness. The Author of the great Etymologicon is of this opinion 
(o) Etym. Magn. in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. , saying, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. e. ' Aeides is the place where nothing can be seen; for Hades is the place of darkness. In this regard Sophocles 
(p) Sophoc. in Oedipo.  gives it the attribute of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or black Hades; and Euripides calleth it to the same purpose but in other terms 
(q) Euripid. in Alcestide. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the house which never sees the sun. Take it in which of these respects soever you will, and derive it from what Etymology you list; yet shall we find that by this word the most learned men amongst the Gentiles, and the exactest Critics of the old Greek Schools, do either take it for the places under the earth designed to reception of unhappy souls; or else for Pluto himself the chief God of hell. Thus Lucian telleth us of the Grecians, that being thereunto persuaded by Hesiod and Homer, and the rest of the Poets, they took Hades to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(r) Lucian de Luctu. , a place under the earth, deep, large, and dark. Thus doth Eustathius that learned and renowned Bishop of Thessalonica, tell us of this Hades, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(s) Eustath. in Iliad. a. , that is, a dark place under the earth; and Phavorinius the Grammarian, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(t) Phav. Lexic. in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. , a place void of light, and full of eternal darkness; Nicetas Choniates, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(u) Nicet. Cho●. in Ball. , the dark and dreadful tabernacles of Hades; Nicephorus Gregoras the Historian, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(x) Nicepb. Gregor. hist. l. 8. , we walked in gross darkness as they say of those that descended to Hades; and Nazianzen the Divine, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(y) Nazianz. in Chron. patient. , coming unto the house of Hades full of mists and darkness. In which last place, it may be, Hades is not taken for the place only, but for Pluto himself, the Lord and Ruler of that place. And by this name we find him called also in divers Authors of good credit amongst the Ancients. For Diodorus Siculus reporteth of the ancient Gentiles, that they took 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the third son of Saturn, (who was the Pluto which we speak of) to be the first inventor of graves and funerals 
(z) Diod. Sicul. hist. l. 5. , and for that cause to be the God of the dead. And before him, the wisemen of the Chaldeans, which they called their Magis, taught that there were two chief authors of all things, a good and a bad; that the good was called Zeus (which was the name of jupiter amongst the Grecians) and Oromasdes; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(a) Diogen. Laert. in Proem. , and that the other was called Hades, or Arimanios: and this saith Plutarch 
(b) Plut. de Iside & Osirid. , was the opinion of the most and wisest. According unto which opinion, himself saith of Hades, or Pluto, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that he is black, and the Master or Prince of the dark night 
(c) Id. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 apud Delphos. . And Homer speaking of the partition of the world between the three sons of Saturn in which division jupiter had the heavens, and Neptune the seas, tells us of Hades, that for his share he had the dark mists to dwell in 
(d) Homer in Iliad. 15. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as his words there are. Which region of dark mists so assigned to Hades (i e. to Pluto the God of hell) he calleth in another place, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(e) Id. Odyss. l. 24. , the house of Hades under the dens or caverns of the earth: in the same sense and words almost as it is called in Theognis, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(f) Theogn. in Gnomon. , they go (saith he) to the house of Hades under the dens of the earth. Infinite are the instances which might be alleged to justify these two significations of the Greek word Hades, and of the Place and Person therein designed, from Aristophanes, Mimnermus, Orpheus, Diphilus an old Comical Poet, and indeed who not? but I conceive these few sufficient to make clear this point. Now whether hell were called Hades from the Prince thereof, as many countries have received denomination from their Kings and Chieftains; or whether the Devil were called Hades from the chief seat of his Empire: as to this day when we say the Persian and Tartarian, we mean the Emperor of Persia, and the Cham of Tartary, it comes all to one. Certain I am they did acknowledge the dominion of Hades to be seated in the lower and infernal Regions, and generally conceived thereof as a place of torments. For chrysostom showing the general consent of all nations in this use of the word 
(g) Chrys. in 2. Cor. hom. 9 , adds that the Grecians, Barbarians, Poets and Philosophers are of this opinion, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that there are judgement seats, (and consequently punishments) in hell. With whom Theodoret consents, commending much the piety of the old Philosophers, in that they sent all the souls of all those to heaven, who lived well and virtuously 
(h( Theod. de fine & judicio. Serm. 11. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but those that did the contrary unto hell below: and saying particularly of Plato, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that in many places he speaks of hell or Hades, as a place of torments. In which it is to be observed that when the Prepositions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are joined with the word Hades in the Genitive case it is to be supplied with some other word to make up the Grammatical construction; as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. e. in the house or regions of Hades.  
Let us next see what use the writers of the new Testament have made of Hades; and in what sense and signification we shall find it there. And first we may observe that it is sometimes used, not often, to signify the Prince of darkness, the very Beelzebub himself, the king of Devils: as in the 20. Chapter of the Revelation, v. 14. were it is said (according to the English translation) that death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. But in the Original it runs thus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. that death and Hades, that is to say, the Gonervours of death and the Prince of hell, received their final condemnation, and were cast into the lake of fire and brimstone. And in this sense, as I conceive, it is also used in a former place of the said book, in which we find mention of a pale horse, death sitting on his back, and Hell 
(i) Apocal. 6. v. 8. , (or Hades saith the Greek, that is to say, the Prince of hell) following after. On which the ancient Expositor in St. Augustine's works gives this Gloss or Comment, Hell followeth after, i. e. Expectantes devorationem multarum animarum 
(k) Homil. 6. in Apocalyps. , expecting to devour the souls of many of those who are slain by death. And this doth very well agree with that of the Apostle, saying, that the Devil is like a roaring lion walking up and down, and seeking whom he may devour 
(l) 1 Pet. 5.8. . But generally the word Hades is used in the new Testament, to signify hell itself, or the place of torments, according to the meaning of the word in common speech. Thus read we in St. Matthews Gospel, that the gates of hell 
(m) Mat. 16.18. , (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek, or the gates of Hades) shall not prevail against the Church: and in St. Luke's Gospel it is said of the great rich glutton, that he was in hell, (in Hades 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, saith the Original) which in in the same verse is affirmed to be a place of torments 
(n) Luk. 16.23. . And in hell he lift up his eyes being in torments, saith the text, v. 23. and in the next verse he complains to Abraham, that he was tormented in those flames. Now these two places are confessed on all sides to be so clearly meant of hell, or the place of Devils, that there is no exception to be made against them. May we not prove the like also of all the rest? I believe we shall. In the 11. Chapter of St. Matthew, it is affirmed of Capernaum, that it was exalted unto heaven, but should be brought down 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to hell, or Hades 
(o) Mat. 11.23, 42. . What should the meaning of this be, but that whereas the Gospel of Christ was now preached unto them, whereby that City was exalted above all the Cities of jewrie; their not receiving of the same being offered to them, made them obnoxious to the righteous judgement of Christ, and liable to everlasting damnation in hell, in the day of doom; which day should be more tolerable to the Land of Sodom, than it would be to them. In the first Epistle to the Corinthians we find this question, O death where is thy sting, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, where is thy victory O Hades 
(p) 1 Cor. 15.55. ? Here Hades in the new translation authorized by K. james, is, I know not why, translated grave; O grave where is thy victory! But than you must observe with all, that hell is added in the margin, to show that they abandoned not the old Translation; where in plain terms we find it thus, Death, where is thy sting? Hell, where is thy victory? and so it standeth in the lesson appointed by the Liturgy to be read at burials. And this translation of the word in that place to the Corinthians, seems most agreeable to some Protestant Doctors of good name and credit. Interim videas ordine quodam inimicos nostros recenseri, infernum sive gehennam, mortem, peccatum & legem 
(q) Pet. Mart. in 1 Cor. 15. ; In the mean time (saith Peter Martyr) we may behold our enemies here mustered in their rank and order; that is to say, hell (or gehenna) death, sin and the law. With whom agreeth Hyperius and Bullinger, in their Comment on the words in question. So then by Hades is meant hell in that place of St. Paul, and so it is no question in two more of the Revelation: in the first whereof, Christ doth appear unto St. john, saying of himself, that he had the keys of hell and of death 
(r) Apoc. 1.18. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, where we find Hades englished hell by the new translators, and nothing added in the margin, (as in that before) to show the place admitted of a different reading. And that we may be sure to know that nothing is there meant by hell, but the house of torments, the place allotted to the damned: Andreas B. of Caesarea, an old Orthodox writer, gives this scholy on it; I have the keys of death and Hades 
(s) And. Caesar. in Apocal. 1. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is to say, of the death of the body, and of the soul. An other old Latin writer to this purpose also; I have the keys of death and hell, because he that believeth and is baptised, is delivered both, from death and hell: This writer whosoever he was is yet not resolved on, but it goes for Augustine's; and is extant in the ninth Tome of that Father's works. With him agreeth Primasius, Haymo and Lyra, amongst the Authors of the middle and declining times of the Church; of the late writers of the Protestant and reformed Churches, Bullinger, Chytraeus, Osiander, Aretius, and Sebastian Meyer. And last of all we have the word thus used in the 20. of the Revelation 
(t) Apocal. 20.13. ; where it is said, that death and Hell, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (saith the Greek) delivered up the dead which were in them. Where though we find the word grave added in the margin, to show that the Translators did admit of that reading: yet by retaining hell in the text itself, they showed withal that they preferred the same before it. And they had reason so to do; so many of the ancient writers expounding it of hell the place of the damned. For so it is interpreted by venerable Beda, Primasius St. Augustine's Scholar, and Haymo for the Latins; by Aretas and Andreas Caesariensis for the Greeks; all of them in their several Commentaries on the text saying the same thing though in divers words. And finally it is so interpreted by St. Augustine also 
(u) Aug. de Civit. l. 20.15. . Nec frustra fortasse non satis fuit ut diceret mors aut infernus, sed utrumque dictum est, etc. that is to say, Nor happily without cause did he not think it enough to say that death or hell, (divisively, had cast up their dead) but he nameth both: death for the just, who might only suffer death, and not also hell; hell for the wicked and unrighteous, who were there to be punished.  
Thus have we looked over all those places where the word Hades doth occur in the new Testament (except that one which is in question, whereof more anon) and find it constantly both englished and interpreted by that of hell; according as we commonly understand the word, for the place of torments. 'tis true, the word admits of other notions amongst some Greek Authors. But that makes nothing to us Christians, who are to use it in that sense, in which it is presented to us in the book of God, interpreted and expounded by the Ancient Fathers, and the tradition of the Church. For though the sacred Penmen of the new Testament writing in Greek, were of necessity to use such words as they found ready to their hands: yet they restrained them many times to some certain and particular meaning, which they retain unto this day, as words of Ecclesiastical use and signification. Of this kind are Ecclesia, Evangelium, Episcopus, Presbyter, Diaconus, Martyr, and the like: which being words of a more general signification in their first original, are now restrained to such particular notions, as the first Preachers of the Gospel thought most fit to reserve them for. Of this kind also is Diabolus, which properly and originally did signify no more than an Accuser; but is now used by all writers both in Greek and Latin, to denote the Devil. And of this kind is Hades also, which whatsoever it might signify in some old Greek writers, more than the Place or Region of hell, or the Prince thereof: is now restrained in general speech to signify only hell itself, or the house of torments; the habitation of the Devil and his Angels. But this we shall the better see, by taking a short view of the use and signification of the word, amongst the best and most approved of the old Greek Ecclesiastical writers. And first josephus, though no Christian, yet one that very well understood the difference between heaven and hell, telleth us of those whose souls were cleansed and favoured of God, that they inhabit in the holiest places of heaven 
(x) joseph. de bello. l. 3. c. 25. : but that they whose hands wax mad against themselves (or who laid hands upon themselves) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, their souls were to be received in the dark vaults of hell or Hades. Theophilus the sixth B. of Antioch about 170. years after Christ, citeth this verse out of the works of the Sibyls, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
(y) Theop. adv. Autolcum. l. 2.  that they sacrificed to the Devils in hell or Hades. In the same times lived justin Martyr, who doth thus inform us, 
(o) Iust. Mart. Resp. 75. add Orthodox.  After the soul (saith he) is departed from the body, straightways there is a separation of the unjust from the just; both being carried by the Angels into places meet for them: that is to say, the souls of the just into Paradise, where is the fellowship and sight of Angels and Archangels with a kind of beholding of Christ our Saviour; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but the souls of the unjust to places in hell or Hades, of which it was said in Scripture unto Nabuchadnezzar, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that Hades below was stirred to meet him, Isa. 14. And to this purpose 
(o) Id. in exhort. ad Graecos.  he both citeth and alloweth those words of Plato▪ where he affirms that when death draweth near to any man, than tales are told 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the things in Hades, how he that here doth deal unjustly shall there be punished, etc. Next him Eusebius speaks thus in the person of Christ, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
(z) Euseb. demonstr. l. 10. c. 8.  etc. I see my descent to hell (or Hades) approach, and the rebellion (against me) of the contrary powers which are enemies to God. And that we may be sure to know what he means by Hades, he tells us out of Plato in another place, that the souls of wicked men departing hence 
(a) Id. Praepar. Evang. l. 13. , immediately after death, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, endured the punishments of hell (or Hades) of their doings here. After man was fallen, saith Athanasius, and by his fall death had prevailed from Adam to Christ, the earth was accursed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, hell (or Hades opened 
(b) Athan. in illud, Omni. mihi traditae sunt.  Paradise shut up, and heaven offended: but after all things were delivered by Christ, the earth received a blessing, Paradise was opened, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Hades or hell did shrink for fear, and heaven set open to all believers. And in another place he speaketh of two several mansions provided by Almighty God for the wicked man, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(c) Id. de in carnat. Christ. , the grave and Hades, whereof one is to receive his body, and the other his soul. St. Basil thus, Death is not altogether evil, except you speak of the death of a sinner; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. 
(d) Basil. Hom. quod Deus non sit author. peccat.  because that their departure hence is the beginning of their punishments in hell (or Hades): and besides 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the evils which are in hell (or Hades) have not God for their cause, but ourselves, etc. And after showing that Dathan and Abiram were swallowed up of the earth; he adds that they were never a whit the better for this kind of punishment, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(e) Id. ibid. , for how could they be so that went down to Hades (or hell) but they made the rest wiser by their example? Infinite more might be alleged from the Fathers of the Eastern Church, to show that when they spoke of Hades, they meant nothing but hell; and should be here produced, were not these sufficient. Only I shall make bold to add the evidence of two or three of the most eminent of the latter writers, to show that in all times and ages, the word retained that notion only which had been given it in the Scriptures, and the old Greek Fathers. Thus than Cydonius, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. 
(f) Cydon. de morte condemn.  that there is in Hades (hell) vengeance for all sins committed, not only the consent of all wise men, but the equity of the divine justice doth most fully prove. Aeneas Gazaeus he comes next, and he tells us this 
(g) Aen. Gaz. theophra. , that he who in a private life committeth small sins and laments them, escapeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the punishments that are in Hades. And finally Gregentius thus, Christ took a rod out of the earth 
(h) Disput. cum Herb. judaeo. , viz. his precious Cross, and stretching forth his hand struck all his enemies therewith, and conquered them: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. that is to say, Hades, or hell, death, sin, and that subtle serpent. So that we see that not alone the sacred penmen of the new Testament, written first in Greek, but also all the Ecclesiastical writers of the Greek Church when they speak of Hades, intent not any thing thereby but hell, the place prepared for the Devils and the damned souls. Let us next see whether the Fathers of the Latin or Western Church have any other meaning when they speak of inferi, or infernum (for they use both words) by which they do expound Hades, or translate it rather; as often as they chance to meet it.  
And first for the Quid nominis take it thus from Augustine. Inferi eo quod infra sunt 
(i) Aug. de Gen. ad litter. l. 12. c. 34. , the inferi are so called (saith he) because they are below, in the parts beneath. And somewhat to this purpose saith Lactantius also 
(k) Lact. Instit. l. 2.2. , Nihil terra inferius & humilius nisi mors & inferi, that there is nothing lower than the earth, but death and inferi. From infra the root or theme the Fathers do derive infernus, of which thus St. Hierome, Inferiora terrarum infernus accipitur 
(l) Hier. Epist. ad Eph. 4. , the lower parts of the earth are called infernus, to which our Saviour did descend. Which as it showeth that infernus was derived from inferius, and so by consequence from infra, as the word inferi was before: so it directs us also where to find the place. And this he doth elsewhere also saying, Simul discimus quod infernus sub terra sit 
(m) Id. in Isa. 14. et ad Eph. 4. ; and in another place, quod autem infernus in inferiore parte terrae sit: in both that it is under the earth, and in the lowermost parts thereof. Tertullian also saith the same, as to the situation of it, Habes regionem inferûm subterraneam credere; we are to believe that the region of inferi is under the earth 
(n) Tertul. de Anima. c. 55. : affirming also that it is in visceribus terrae abstrusa profunditas, a bottomless pit in the very bowels of the earth. In this there is no difference amongst the Ancients: in the nature or meaning of the word there is. For by Tertullian the word inferi is taken for a place under the earth, whither the souls of good and bad descend after death; the good to a kind of refreshing, the bad to punishments: affirming for a certain truth, or rather pronouncing so ex tripod (for so the word Constituimus imports) omnem animam apud inferos sequestrari in diem domini 
(o) Id. ibid. ; that the soul of every man is kept in Inferi, till the day of the Lord. Which as it was a fancy private to himself, after his lapse into the heresy of Montanus; so he received no countenance in it from the rest of the Fathers, by whom it is unanimously agreed upon, that the souls of all good Christians are received into Paradise. 'Tis true indeed, that Hierome seemeth to incline to the same opinion; where speaking of the difference between death and inferi, he saith, that death is that whereby the soul is separated from the body 
(p) Hier. in Ose. c. 13. : infernus, in quo animae includuntur, sive in refrigerio sive in poenis, and that infernus is the place wherein the souls of men are kept, either in some refreshments, or else in punishments. Which seems to be the same with that which Tertullian had affirmed before; but it doth but seem so. For when he speaketh of inferi or infernus, in this extension of the word, he relates only to the times before the coming of our Saviour, and his victory over death and hell; and not at all unto the times of the Gospel. For thus he doth explain himself in another place; Solomon speaketh thus, saith he, because before the coming of our Saviour, omnia pariter ad inferos ducerentur 
(q) Hier. in Eccl. 3. , all were alike carried to the inferi, or the places below; and that thereupon it was that Job complained, how both the godly and the wicked were detained in inferno: (whereunto this expression tendeth, we shall see hereafter.) The same he saith in his notes or Comment upon another Chapter of the same book of solomon's, affirming plainly, ante adventum Domini omnes quamvis sanctos inferni lege detentos 
(r) Id. in Eccl 9 , that before the coming of the Lord all men how just and holy soever were detained under the Law of infernus. But then immedately he addeth, that since the resurrection of Christ the case is otherwise, and that the souls of righteous men, nequaquam inferno teneantur, are by no means to be supposed to be detained in infernus 
(s) Id. ibid. : and this he proveth from that of the Apostle, saying, I desire to be dissolved and to be with Christ; and he that is with Christ, saith he, is not held in infernus. So that whatsoever he conceived of infernus before Christ's coming (the truth of which opinion we dispute not here) 'tis plain that since the resurrection he leaves it for a place appointed to the wicked only, there to be held in everlasting pains and torments. And so elsewhere he doth define it; Infernus locus suppliciorum & cruciatuum est, in quo videter dives purpuratus 
(t) Id. in Isa. 14. : that is to say, infernus is the place of punishments and torments, where the richman clothed in purple was seen (by Lazarus). Nay even Tertullian, though he had made himself an inferi of his own devising, acknowledgeth the prison which the Gospel speaketh of, (Mat. 5.24, 25.) to be no other than this inferi 
(u) Tertul. de Anima. c. 58. ; and therefore certainly not the receptacle both for good and bad, the just and unjust. But none of all the Ancients states this point more clearly then divine St. Augustine, who looking more judiciously into the business doth affirm expressly:  
Frist, Of the inferi or place itself, nusquam scripturarum in bono appellatos potui invenire 
(x) August. in Epist. 99 ▪ that he could never find any place of Scripture, in which the word inferi was taken in any good sense.  
Secondly, that he could never find, that the place was called inferi (y), 
(x) Id. de Gen. ad let. l. 12. c. 33. , ubi justorum animae requiescunt, where the souls of the righteous were at rest.  
Thirdly, that past all peradventure since the descent of Christ into hell, boni & fideles prorsus inferos nesciunt 
(z) Id. de Civ. l. 20. c. 15. , the godly believers are acquainted with no such place.  
And last of all, Non nisi poenalia recte intelligi (per) inferna 
(a) Id. Epist. 57 , that infernus can be taken for nothing rightly but the place of punishments. And in this sense, according unto these restrictions and explanations have the words inferi and infernus been since used in most Orthodox writers: and in that sense still used by the old translator of the new Testament into Latin, as often as he meeteth with the Greek Hades. And so St. Ambrose also doth interpret or expound the same; where saying that according to the Theology of the old Philosophers, the souls of men severed from their bodies went unto Hades; he gives this gloss upon the word, id est, locum qui non videtur, quem locum latin infernum dicimus 
(b) Amb. de bon● mortis. c. 10. , that is to say, a place unseen, which in Latin we do call infernus. But as there is no general rule but hath some exceptions; so this hath one exception, and but only one: there being one only place in the new Testament where Hades is translated otherwise in the vulgar Latin; that namely 1 Cor. 15.55. where it is rendered mors, or death. Of which no reason can be given, unless perhaps he fell upon some such Greek copies as Eusebius did, wherein the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was twice repeated, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; i. e. O death where is thy sting? O death where is thy victory? To which I do incline the rather, because the reading of the Latin is exceeding ancient, ubi est mors aculeus tuus? ubi est mors contentio tua? (where we find also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. e. strife for victory) occurring in Tertullian 
(c) Tertul. de resur. carn.. , Cyprian 
(d) Ad Quirin. l. 3. c. 58. , and others of the ancient writers. So that the word Hades being used throughout the whole new Testament, to signify the place of torments; and inferi or infernus by the old Latin translator, to express that word: it must needs be that inferi and infernus throughout the Testament, and with most Ecclesiastical Authors since the translating of it, must signify the selfsame place, which we English, usually call the name of Hell.  
These things premised we shall the better be enabled to discern what the meaning is of Christ's descent into hell, whether the words import any local descent or only something analogical and proportionable to it. That the Apostles and Evangelists did first commit the sacred monuments of the faith which they left behind them, to the Greek tongue, as being then of an extent more universal than that of the Romans and the jews, is a thing past question: unless perhaps St. Matthews Gospel was first written in the Hebrew language, as St. Jerome 
(e) Hierom. de Eccl. scriptor. , and some other learned men have been of opinion. And therefore it is more than probable, that they delivered this brief Abstract of the Christian faith, which we call the Creed, in the same tongue also, in which they did communicate those Oracles of eternal life. Which granted, as I think no question will be made thereof, what else can follow thereupon, but that the word Hades in the Creed, must be taken in the selfsame sense, in which we find it generally used (not one place excepted) in the whole new Testament: those very men, whose writings make up a great part of the said new Testament, contributing their several Articles to make up the Creed? And than what else can be supposed to be the meaning of Christ's descent into hell, but that he locally went down, which is the ordinary meaning of the word descend; and went down to the place of torments, which in the common course of speech is generally designed by the name of hell? Or if the Creed were first compiled and published in the Latin tongue, the same conclusion must needs follow from the former premises: the Latin inferi or infernus, (as before was proved) signifying the very same with the Greek word Hades, and that imparting nothing else, (according to the Ecclesiastical notion) but the English, Hell. Besides the Apostles purposely intended this (and whosoever else we shall please to think were the Authors of it, did intend the same) to lay down plainly and methodically, according to the understanding of the vulgar sort, that which they thought most fitting to comprise in this short Compendium. Nor can it enter into the belief of any man endued with ordinary sense and reason, that the Apostles having before made use of those vulgar phrases, was crucified, dead, and buried, in the literal sense, which every Artisan, and Ploughman, nay even women and children could not but understand at the first hearing: should then come in with a descent into hell, not to be understood in a literal sense, as the words usually import in common speech; but in a meaning too abstruse and difficult for all vulgar wits, beyond the reach of ordinary apprehensions. Assuredly it was never the Apostles meaning that they for whose use principally they compiled the Creed, and in whose language it was written (which soever it was) should not be able to conceive the true sense of their words, without the help of a Lexicon, or having diligent recourse unto the Critics and Philosophers of their several Languages.  
But because Arguments of this nature may perhaps be said not to be demonstrative, and that men will not readily let go their holdfast upon probabilities, we will proceed another way, and fetch the truth of this assertion that Christ descended into hell, in a literal sense, from the authority and text of holy Scripture. Most sure it is that there is nothing comprehended in the Creed, but what is to be found in the book of God, either in terms express, (as the greatest part of them are) or else by necessary and undeniable consequence. And both these ways we doubt not but we shall be able to assert this Article.  
First, in the way of necessary undeniable consequence it may be pleaded from that place of St. Paul to the Romans 
(f) Rom. 10.6, 7. , where it is said, The righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend up into heaven? that is to bring Christ down from above; Or who shall descend into the deep? that is to bring up Christ again from the dead; For the expounding of which words we first take notice, that the two interrogatives are equivalent to these general negatives, none can ascend up into heaven; none can descend into the deep. And then the meaning will be this, that if none can ascend to heaven, nor descend down into the deep, than not Christ himself: which to affirm, were plainly and directly contrary unto the righteousness of faith. So that it is a main ground of the Christian faith, that Christ descended into the deep, and into such a deep as hath some proportion to his ascension into heaven; which possibly can be no other than the deeps of hell. And hereunto agree Interpreters both old and new. For thus Theophylact, Stagger not saith St. Paul, nor cast this doubtingly in thy mind, how Christ descended from heaven, or how after death he arose from the deep again 
(g) Theophyl. in Rom. 10. , id est, ex abditissimo & profundissimo loco, that is to say, from the deepest and most hidden place. And why was hell called Hades amongst the Greeks, but quasi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, dark, hidden, and unseen, as before was said? More plainly Mart. Bucer for the late writers thus, The Apostle acknowledgeth this question to be a denial of Christ, and that he draweth Christ down from heaven who admitteth this doubt 
(h) Bucer in Rom. 10. . It is evident that the deep is taken pro infernis, Hell, and in this sense the Apostle seemeth to use this word the deep; for he addeth, that is to bring back Christ from the dead, to wit, to account his descent to hell to be void, and his victory over death, and hell, (Gehenna) of none effect. So then the meaning of this text will be briefly this, that according to the Christian faith, these actions which to men seemed so impossible, those namely ascending up into heaven, and descending down into the deeps of hell, were performed for us in the person of Christ: and therefore now to doubt of either, were nothing else but to enervate and weaken the power of Christ, who most perfectly hath accomplished both, to save us from the one, and bring us to the other. Besides the Reader may take notice, that that which our Translatours have rendered by these words the deep, is called in the Greek Original by the name of Abyssus which signifieth a bottomless pit, and is so taken and translated in the Revelation, Chap. 9.2. & 11.7. where it can probably meant of no place but hell. In the next place we meet with that of the Ephesians 
(i) Eph. 4.8, 9, 10. , where it is said, When he ascended up on high he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lowest parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things. Now in these words we may observe;  
First, that before Christ's ascending by way of relation the Apostle putteth Christ's descending.  
Secondly, that because descending and ascending must have contrary extremes, from which and to which the motion is made; therefore St. Paul opposeth the lowest parts of the earth to which Christ first descended, unto the highest heavens of all above which he ascended.  
Thirdly, that these lowest parts of the earth could not be the grave, (as some men would have it) which is seldom two yards deep, in the ground, and so not opposite (in that respect) to the height of the heavens, according to the words and inference of the Apostle.  
And Fourthly, that the end of his descending was to lead captivity captive, to beat them from the place of their chiefest strength; even as the end of his ascending after he had led captivity captive, was to give gifts to men. For what place fitter for the scene of so great an action, as the full conquest of death, sin, and Satan, the final dissolution of the kingdom of darkness, than the chief seat and fortress of their whole empire, which is hell itself, situate in the lowest parts of the earth, as before was shown. And hereunto agreeth the exposition of the ancient Fathers. St. Irenaeus citing these very words of the Apostle, that Christ descended into the lower parts of the Earth, makes them equivalent with those words of David concerning Christ, viz. thou shalt not leave my soul in the neathermost Hell; saying, 
(k) Irenaeus adv. haeres. l. 5. c. 31.  Hoc & David in eum prophetans dixit, and so much David said of him by way of prophecy. Tertullian alleging the same words of the Apostle, concludeth thence, 
(l) Tertul. de Anima c. 35.  Habes ergo Regionem In●erum subterraneam, i. e. by this thou mayst perceive that the place of Hell is under the earth. Chrysostom thus, 
(m) Chrysost. in Ephes. c. 4.  Christ descended to the lower parts of the earth, beneath which there are none other; and he ascended above all, higher then which there is nothing. St. Ambrose on these words of Paul, gives us this short gloss, 
(n) Ambros. ibid.  After death Christ descended to Hell; whence rising the third day, he ascended above all the heavens. St. Hierome on the same saith thus, Qui descendit in anima ad infernum, ipse cum anima & corpore ascendit in Coelum 
(o) Hieron. in Ephes. c. 4. , that is to say, he that descended to Hell in his soul only, ascended into Heaven both with soul and body. Primasius doth not only concur with Hierom in his Exposition of the place 
(p) Primas. ibid. , but repeats also his very words. Oecumenius out of Photius thus, 
(q) Oecumen. in Ephes. c. 4.  To the lower parts of the earth, he meaneth Hell, beneath which place there is no lower. Next Haymo 
(r) Haymo ibid.  Christ descended first into the lower parts of the earth, that is into hell, and after ascended into heaven. Which said, he gives this reason of his Exposition, as Hierom and Primasius had done before, that by the lower parts of the earth, he must needs mean hell, which is called infernus in the Latin, because it is lower than the earth, or rather under it. And finally Theophylact thus asks the question 
(s) Theophyl. in Ephes. 4. , Quem in locum descendit, into what place did Christ descend? And presently returns this answer, in infernum, etc. into hell, which St. Paul calleth the lowest parts of the earth, after the common opinion of men.  
There is another part of this Text of Scripture touching the leading of Captivity Captive, of which we have said nothing from the ancient Writers, because I purposed to consider it with another Text, near of kin unto it; where it is said, 
(t) Col. 2.15.  that having spoilt principalities and powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them. In both which texts we must distinguish between the taking of Captivity captive, and the leading of them as in triumph, being once so taken; between the spoiling of those principalities and powers the Apostle speaketh of, and the open show or triumph which was made upon it. The first was only the great work of Christ's descent into Hell; the other the chief pomp and glory of his Resurrection and Ascension. For clearing of which point we may please to know, that the Devil since the fall of man laid a claim to mankind, and held him like a captive in the bonds of sin: by means whereof as he drew many after him into the pit of torments, so he presumed to have the like advantages over all the rest. And though Christ's overmastering Satan began here on the earth, when he cast him out of such as he had possessed: yet his full and final conquest could not be accomplished, till he had followed and pursued him over all the world, driven him at last into the very heart and seat of his Dominion, which was Hell itself, and there, in the presence of his Angels and other instruments of mischief, destroyed his power, dissolved his Empire, and put a period to his tyranny over the sons of men. And this is that to which the Fathers do attest both with heart and hand; but none more clearly to this purpose then St. Athanasius, 
(u) Athanas. in passion. & cruc.  The Devil, saith he, was fallen from Heaven, he was cast from the earth, pursued through the air, every where conquered, and every where straightened; in which distress 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he determined to keep Hell safe, which was all that was left him. But the Lord a true Saviour would not leave his work unfinished, nor leave those which were in Hades as yielded to the enemy: so that the Devil thinking to kill one, lost all; and hoping to carry one to Hell (or Hades) was himself cast out 
(x) Id. ibid. . By means whereof Hades (or Hell) is abrogated, death no more prevailing, but all being raised unto life; neither can the Devil stand any more against us, but is fallen, and indeed creepeth on his breast and belly. Which said, he adds this of the Saints, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that thus in fine they saw Hell spoilt. Epiphanius, in this order marshalleth the acts of Christ, He was crucified, buried, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he descended to places under the earth, he took captivity captive, and rose again the third day 
(y) Epiphan. in Anacephal. . By which we see, that the taking of captivity captive, was one of the effects of his descent into Hell; and that both his descent and victory over Hell and Satan, are placed between his burial and Resurrection. In the Homilies which Leo the Emperor made for the exercise of his style and the Confession of his Faith, wherein no doubt he had the judgement and advice of the ablest men that were about him, he doth thus deliver it; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Christ is risen (saith he) bringing Hades (or the Devil) prisoner with him, and proclaiming liberty to the Captives 
(z) Leo Imp. Hom. 2. the Resurrect. . He that held others bound is now bound himself, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Christ is now come from Hell, (or Hades) with his ensign of triumph; as appear by the sour and heavy looks of those which were overthrown, that is to say, of Hades (meaning there, as first, the old Satan himself) together with Death also, and the hateful Devils. Dorotheus in his Book de Paschate, very plainly thus, What means this that he led captivity captive 
(a) Doroth. de paschate. c. 12. ? It means, saith he, that by Adam's transgression the Enemy had made us all captives, and had us in subjection; and that Christ took us again out of the Enemy's hand, and conquered him who made us captive. And then concludes, Erepti igitur sumus ab Inferis ob Christi humanitatem, that we were then delivered from the power of Hell by the manhood or humanity of Christ our Saviour. St. Cyprian though more ancient, and not so clear as he in this particular, doth yet touch it thus; Descendens ad inferos captivam ab antiquo duxit captivitatem, that Christ descended into Hell brought back those captives which had before been captivated 
(b) Cyprian de unctio. Chrysm. . And in another place which we saw before, 
(c) Id. de passione Christi.  When in the presence of Christ Hell was broken open, and thereby captivity made captive, his conquering soul being first presented to his Father, returned unto his body without delay. But to look back again to the old Greek Fathers who are far more positive and express in this, than the Latins are, we are thus told by Athanasius in another place 
(d) Athanas.  that the Lord rose the third day from the dead, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, having spoilt hell, trodden the enemy under foot, dissolved death, broken the chains of sin with which we were tied, and freed us which were bound from the chains thereof. St. Cyril of Alexandria thus, 
(e) Cyril de recta fide l. 2.  Our Lord (saith he) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. having spoilt death, and loosed the number of souls which were detained in the dens of the earth, rose again the third day from the dead. Which words of Cyril are repeated and approved in the Council of Ephesus, and afterwards confirmed in the fifth General Council holden at Constantinople 
(f) Concil. Constant. Seff. 6. . St. Hierom finally on the parable of the strong man which was bound and spoiled, Mat. 12. gives this observation (which I had almost pretermitted) viz. that this strong man was tied and bound in Hell 
(g) Hieronyn. in Matth. 12 , and trodden under the Lords feet, and the Tyrant's house being spoilt captivity also was led captive. In which quotations from the Fathers, we must take this with us, that when they speaking of spoiling Hell, and vanquishing the powers thereof, they do allude as evidently to the spoiling of principalities and powers mentioned in that to the Colossians; as they insist upon the taking of captivity captive, expressed in that to the Ephesians. In a word, take the sum of all which by the Ancients is delivered upon those two Texts, in these words of Zanchius, a very learned Writer of the Reformed Churches. The Fathers (saith he) for the most part are of this opinion 
(h) Zanchius ad Ephes. c. 4. , that Christ in his soul came to the place of the damned to signify not in words but with his presence that the justice of God was satisfied by his death and bloodshed; and that Satan had no longer power over his Elect, whom he held captive, etc. As also that he might carry all the Devils with him in a triumph, as it is Coloss. 2. He spoiled powers and principalities, and made an open show of them, leading them (as captives) in a triumph by the virtue of his Cross, by which he had purged away sins and appeased the justice of God. So Zanchius.  
But the most clear and pregnant place of holy Scripture, for proof of Christ● descent into Hell, is that of the 2. of the Acts: where the Apostle citing those words of David 
(i) Psal. 16.9. , Thou wilt not leave my soul in Hell, nor suffer thine holy One to see corruption; applieth it thus unto our Saviour, that David seeing this before, spoke of the Resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in Hell, neither did his flesh see corruption 
(k) Act. 2.31. . In which particular words, (those before recited) it is clear and manifest, that the soul and body of Christ were by God appointed to be superior to all contrary powers, that is the soul to Hell, and the flesh to the grave; and that from both, Christ was to rise an absolute conqueror that he might sit on his heavenly Throne as Lord over all, not by promise only, as before, but in fact and proof. But for the whole Sermon of St. Peter made on this occasion, it may be summed up briefly to this effect 
(l) bilson's survey, p. 623.  that is to say, that the Prophecy of David neither was nor could be fulfilled in any, no not in David himself, but only in the promised Messiah: for that his soul should not be left in Hell (or Hades) nor his flesh see corruption, but was fulfilled in that Christ whom ye cruelly crucified. He it is that is risen Lord of all in his own person, the sorrows of death being loosed before him: he is ascended up to Heaven, as David likewise foretold of him, and there sitteth on the right hand of God, until all that be his enemies in the rest of his Members be made his footstool: and thence hath he shed forth this which you now see and hear, even the promise of the holy Ghost received of the Father for all his. And therefore know ye for a surety, that God hath made him both Lord, and Christ, i. e. Lord over all in Heaven, Earth, Hell; and Christ even the Anointed Saviour of all his Elect. And to this purpose saith St. Augustine, Quamobrem teneamus firmissime, etc. 
(m) August. Epist. 99  Wherefore let us most firmly hold that which is comprehended in our Faith (or the heads thereof) confirmed by most sound authority, namely that Christ died according to the Scriptures, and was buried, and according to the Scriptures also rose again the third day, with the rest of those things which are most clearly testified of him in the written Word. In quibus etiam hoc est quod apud Inferos fuit, etc. Amongst which this is one point also, that he was in Hell, and loosed the sorrows of the same, of which it was impossible that he should be holden. In which last words, the Father plainly doth relate to the 24. verse, being the beginning almost of St. Peter's Sermon. Where though the Copies of the Testaments which are extant now, read not as Augustine doth, Solutis doloribus inferni, having loosed the pains of Hell, but the pains of death: yet many of the ancient Copies were as St. Augustine readeth it. For Athanasius sometimes useth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he loosed the pains of Hell 
(n) Athanas. in passi. & crucem. , and sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the sorrows of death. Epiphanius in two places 
(o) In Aneorat. & haeres. 69.  reads it thus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that it was impossible for Christ to be holden or detained in Hell. And the same Copies as it seems were followed also by Irenaeus l. 3. c. 12. by Cyprian in his tract the Passione Christi, by Fulgentius, l 3. ad Thrasimundum, and by Bede also in his Retractations on the Acts. Which strong agreement of the Ancients, with the sight perhaps of some of the ancient Copies did prevail so far on Robert stephan's the famous Printer of Paris, that in the New Testament in Greek of the larger volume, of the year 1550. he caused this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be put in the margin as a different reading, remaining still in divers copies. But this is only by the way, not out of it; as that which did afford another argument unto the Ancients, for proof of Christ's descent into hell, and his short stay in it; by the pains or sorrows whereof it was impossible that he should be holden. Nor did it only serve as a good argument for them, in their several times, and is to be of no use since the Text went otherwise. I believe not so. For since both readings have been found in the ancient Writers, and neither can be rejected as false: the word death, must be so expounded where it is retained, as that it may not contradict that of Hell or Hades. For being that death hath a double power, place, and subject, upon the body here on earth, and on the soul in Hell hereafter: the Text may not unfitly be understood of the later death, the pains and sorrows whereof were loosed by Christ, because it was impossible they should fasten on him. But to return unto the not leaving of Christ's soul in Hell, (the tricks and shifts for the eluding of which Text we shall see hereafter) it could not be intended of the grave only, as some men would have it; or to relate only to the Resurrection, as 
(p) Ap. B. bilson's survey, p. 622.  they give it out. For to rise simply from the grave was not sufficient to show the sovereignty of Christ as the Lord of all, Heaven, Earth, and Hell, being made subject to his Throne; nor to express and signify the eternity of it, which was to last till all his Enemies were made his footstool. Some had been raised from death to life by the two famous Prophets in the Old Testament; some by our Saviour in the New: none of which could lay claim under that pretence to the Throne of David, or to be Lord of all things as our Saviour was. Besides this passage being recorded by St. Luke, who in his Gospel useth the same word Hades for the place of torments, 
(q) Lnk. 16.23. , as before was shown: it is not probable that he should use it here in another sense, or if he did, that none of all the Latin Fathers, and Interpreters should ever observe it, who render it by Infernus, Hell, as often as they have occasion to speak thereof. I close this point with that of Augustine, who speaking of this Prophecy of David concerning Christ, he saith, it is not to be contradicted, nor otherwise to be expounded than it is there interpreted by St. Peter himself 
(r) Aug. Ep. 99 : and then adds this for a conclusion of the whole, Who but an Infidel will deny Christ's descent into Hell?  
So far the light of holy Scripture, interpreted according to the general consent and Exposition of the Ancient Fathers, hath directed us in this enquiry: and we have found such good assurance in the cause, that the addition of more evidence would but seem unnecessary: yet that the Catholic Tradition of the Church of Christ may be found to incline the same way also, we will draw down the line thereof from the very times of the Apostles to those days of darkness, in which all good learning was devoured and swallowed up in the night of ignorance. For first Thaddaeus whom St. Thomas sent to preach the Gospel to Abgarus the King or Prince of Edessa, taught him and his, amongst other Catechetical points contained in the Apostles Creed, that they must believe 
(s) Euseb. hist. Eccl. l. 1. c 13. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. that is to say, that Christ descended into Hell, and broke the wall which had been never broke before since the world began, and rose again, and raised the dead, some of the which had slept from the first creation. I know this story of Thaddaeus hath been called in question, in these later days: nor have I time and leisure to assert it now. All I shall say, is that Eusebius who relates it, refers himself unto the monuments and Records of the City of Edessa, out of which he had it: and 'tis well known Eusebius never was reputed either to be a fabulous or too credulous Author. Next to Thaddaeus comes Ignatius the Apostles scholar, who speaks of Christ's descent into Hades, in the same terms as before: adding withal 
(t) Ignat. Epist. ad Trallian. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that he went down alone (to Hades) but ascended with a great multitude unto his Father. And this he saith, after he had made mention of his death and burial in a former passage of the same Epistle. St. Irenaeus he comes next, and he tells us this, that David prophesied thus of CHRIST 
(u) Irenae. adv. haeres. l. 5. c. 31. , thou shalt not leave my soul in the neathermost Hell. After him Origen, Christ saith he, having bound the strong man, and conquered him by his Cross, went even unto his house, to the house of death, and unto Hell 
(x) Orig. l. 5. in Rom. c. 6. ; and thence took his goods, that is, the souls which he possessed. Then cometh Eusebius next in order, To him only (saith he, speaking of Christ) were the gates of death opened, and him only the keepers of Hell-gates seeing, shrunk for fear 
(y) Euseb. de Demonst. l. 10. c. 8. ; and the chief Ruler of death (the Devil) knowing him alone to be his Lord, rose out of his Throne and spoke unto him fearfully with supplications and entreaty. Next him another Eusebius, surnamed Emisenus 
(z) Euseb. Emis. hom. 6. the Pasc. , The Lord (saith he) descending, darkness trembled at the sudden coming of an unknown light, and the deepness of the dark mists of Hell saw the bright star of Heaven. Deposito corpore imas atque abditas Tartari sedes, filius hominis penetravit; and the Son of man laying by his body, penetrated to the lowest and most secret seats of Tartarus (or the dungeons of Hell). Then comes the Renowned Athanasius 
(a) Athanas. de in carn. Chri. , There are (saith he) no other places but the grave and Hell, out of which man was perfectly freed by Christ. And this appeareth not only in us, but in the death of Christ also, the body going to the grave, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. and the soul descending unto Hell, being places severed with a very great distance: the grave receiving his body, for there it was present, and Hell (or Hades) his soul. Else how did Christ present his own soul to the souls in bands, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that he might break in sunder the bands or chains of the souls detained in Hell. St. Basil next 
(b) Basil. in Psal. 48. , When David said, God will deliver my soul from the power of Hell, he doth plainly prophesy, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; the descent of the Lord to Hell, (or Hades) to redeem the Prophet's souls with others, that they should not be detained there. So Nazianzen 
(c) Nazianz. Orat. Dei de fill. , Christ died, but he restored to life, and by his death abolished death; he was buried, but he rose again; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, He descended into Hell, but he brought back souls and ascended into Heaven. Macarius 
(c) Nazianz. Orat. Dei de fill. , to the same purpose also 
(d) Macarius' homil. 11. . When thou hearest that Christ delivered souls, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, out of hell and darkness, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and that the Lord descended to Hell, and performed an admirable work; think that these things are not far from thine own soul. St. Chrysostom, then being one of the Presbyters of the Church of Antioch 
(e) Chrys. hom. 2. in symbol. , composed two Homilies upon the Creed, in one of which, after he had spoken of the death and burial of our Saviour, he adds this, descendit ad infernum, that he descended unto Hell, that this also might not want a wonder. Epiphanius though in other points his Enemy, doth agree with him in this particular, touching the descent of Christ into Hell, though he differ both from him and others in making the Deity of Christ to be united with his soul in the performance of that action, to the end that Hades 
(f) Epiphan. l. 2. haeres. 69. , (so he calls the Devil) the chief Ruler thereof thinking to lay hands on a man, and not knowing that his Deity was united to his sacred soul, Hades himself might be surprised, and death dissolved, and that fulfilled which was spoken, Thou shalt not leave my soul in hell. To this agrees St. Cyril of Alexandria 
(g) Cyril. de fide ad Theodos.  thus; The soul which was coupled and united to the Word, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, descended into hell (or Hades) and using the power and the force of the Godhead showed itself to the spirits there. For we must not say that the Godhead of the only begotten, which is a nature uncapable of death, and no way conquerable by it, was brought back from the dark caverns of the earth. To the same also saith john Damascene 
(h) Damasc. de fide Orth. 3.22. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. i. e. The deified soul of Christ descended to Hades, that as to those upon the earth, the Sun of righteousness was risen, so to those who sat under the earth, and in shades and darkness light might also shine.  
Next look we on the Fathers of the Western Church, and we shall find as general consent amongst them for proof of Christ's descent into hell; as before we had amongst the Fathers of the Eastern. And first beginning with Tertullian, the most ancient of the Latin Writers, he doth not only tell us in plain terms 
(i) Tertull. de anima c. 55. , Christum inferos adiisse, that Christ went into hell; but adds this reason of it also, ne nos adiremus, that we might not go thither. St. Cyprians judgement in the point we have seen before, where he declareth that Hell had been broken open in the presence of Christ when he led captivity captive, etc. Spolians inferos & captivos praemittens ad superos 
(k) Cyr. de resurrect. Chri. , first spoiling hell; and then sending the captives before towards Heaven. Arnobius thus; Postea vidit inferos, etc. in Abyssi profunda descendens. 
(l) Arnobius in Psal. 137.  After (his Passion) he visited hell, and not only became far off from heaven, but even from the earth itself, descending into the depth of the bottomeless pit. Lactantius, if the verse be his, showing how the darkness of hell vanished at the brightness of Christ 
(m) Lactant. in Carminibus. , then adds, Hinc tumulum repetens post Tartara, carne resumpta, etc. that after his being in hell, he returned to his grave, and resuming his body, went to heaven like a noble Conqueror. St. Hilary of Poitiers next, The powers of heaven 
(n) Hilar. de Trinitate l. 3.  (saith he) do incessantly glorify the Name of God for conquering death, and breaking the gates of hell; for in hell he conquered death. Christ 
(o) Hieronyn. in job c. 12.  (saith St. Hierom) destroyed and broke open the enclosed places of hell, and put the Devil which had power over death, out of his Kingdom and Dominion. And in another place more plainly 
(p) Id. in Esai. cap. 14. , Hell (saith he) is the place of punishments and torments, ad quem descendit & Dominus ut vinctos de carcere dimitteret, to which the Lord descneded to release those from prison who were therein bound. St. Ambrose to the same effect 
(q) Ambros. de mysterio Pasch. cap. 4. , Expers peccati Christus cum ad Tartari ima descenderet, etc. Christ (saith he) being void of sin when he descended to the lowest pit of hell, destroying the Dominion of death, recalled out of the Devils jaws to eternal life, the souls of those who there lay bounden for their sins. St. Austin living in those times, though he assert as much as any, the descent into hell; yet gives a more unquestionable reason for it 
(r) Aug. Ep. 57 . Quaeri solet, si non nisi poenalia intelligantur inferna, etc. It is demanded if Infernus (Hell) be taken for no other than the place of punishment, how we may safely believe that the Soul of our Lord Christ descended thither. But it is answered, ideo descendisse, ut quibus oportuit subveniret, that he descended into hell to succour those that were to be succoured. And in another place more clearly as unto the reason, 
(s) Id. in Ps. 85.  There is (saith he) a lower hell, whither the deceased use to go, from whence God would deliver our souls by sending his Son thither. Ideo enim ille usque ad infernum pervenit, ne nos in inferno maneremus; for therefore went Christ even unto hell, that we should not remain in hell. Vigilius showing how our Saviour could be both in Hell and in the grave, doth resolve it thus 
(t) Vig. cont. Eutichet. l. 2. c. 3. , Dicimus ergo Dominum jacuisse in sepulchro sed in solo corpore, & descendisse ad infernum sed in sola anima; viz. that the Lord lay in the grave as to his body alone, but descended down to Hell in his soul only. Ruffinus commenting on this Article of the Creed 
(u) Ruffin. in Symbol. , gives it briefly thus, Quod in Infernum descendit audenter pronunciatur in Psalmis, that Christ's descent into hell is evidently foretold in the Psalms; and then, eo usque ille miserando descendit, usque quo tu peccando dejectus es; that is to say, Christ out of his mercy descended to that very place unto which man was fallen by sin. Petrus Chrysologus in the next Age thus 
(x) Chrysolog. in Symbol. , To suffer death and to conquer it, intraffe inferos & rediisse, to enter into hell and return back again, to come within the jaws of the dungeon of hell, and to dissolve the laws thereof, is not of weakness, but of power. Fulgentius states the point more fully 
(y) Fulgent. ad Thrasimun. l. 3. , It remained (saith he) to the full accomplishment of our Redemption, that the man whom God took unto himself without sin, should descend even thither, whither man separated from God fell by desert of sin, that is to hell, where the soul of a sinner useth to be tormented; and to the Grave, where the body of the sinner useth to be corrupted: yet so that neither Christ's flesh might rot in the grave, nor his soul be tormented with the sorrows of hell. To omit Arator and Prudentius who affirm as much as those before, but may be thought to have spoken out of Poetical liberty; we will next look upon the Fathers of the fourth Council of Toledo, An. 630. after the birth of our Saviour; by whom it was declared that Christ descended to hell 
(z) Concil. Tole●. 4. c. 10. , to deliver the Saints which there were held (captive) and subduing the kingdom of death rose again. Which after was repeated and confirmed in the Council of Orleans, holden in the 46. year of Charles the Great. Finally to descend no lower, Venantius Fortunatus once Bishop of Poitiers, doth resolve it thus: 
(a) Venantius in Symbol.  first, that Christ did descend to hell; and secondly, that his descent into hell was no disparagement unto him, for that he did it with relation to his infinite mercies; as if a King should enter into a Prison, not to be there detained himself, but to release and lose all such as were guilty.  
Thus have we seen the suffrages of the ancient Writers in their times and ages, touching the descent of Christ into hell, with such a general consent and unanimity, that a greater is not to be found in all or any of the Articles of the Christian faith. And we have also seen the reasons which (as they thought) induced our Saviour unto that descent, the benefits which did accrue to the Church thereby. Now these being principally three, that is to say, the vanquishing of the powers of hell. Secondly, the securing of his faithful servants from coming under the dominion thereof: And thirdly, the delivery of the souls of those righteous men, which lived under the law, and were held captive for a time by the powers of darkness, till he released them by his coming: two of the three, I hold to be undoubtedly true; and the other I consider as a matter questionable.  
And first I take it for a truth, an undoubted truth, that our Saviour Christ by his descent into hell, did utterly subdue and overthrow the Kingdom of Satan, and gave him his last blow in his own Dominions, and that thereby he took this captivity captive 
(b) Ephes. 4.9. , and having spoilt those principalities and powers 
(c) Col. 2.15. , (which do there inhabit) did make a show of them openly; and triumph over them. The Scriptures explicated by the Fathers do most abundantly confirm me in the truth of that. To which add here (which was before omitted in its proper place) those words of Cyril Patriarch of Alexandria, saying, 
(y) Cyril. in Levit. c. 9  The powers, principalities, and rulers of the world, (which the Apostle speaks of there) none other could conquer and carry into the Deserts of hell, but only he who said, Be of good hope, for I have overcome the world. Therefore it was necessary that our Lord and Saviour should not only be born a man amongst men, but also should descend to hell, that he might carry into the Wilderness of hell, the Goat which was to be led away; and returning thence, (that work performed) might ascend to his Father.  
And I do also hold for a truth undoubted, that Christ by his descent into hell, hath secured all his faithful servants since that time from coming under the power and dominion of it. Which as it was the doctrine of the eldest times of Christianity, as appeareth by the objection of Tertullian, At inquiunt, Christus inferos adiit ne nos adiremus 
(e) Tertul. de anima c. 55. , that they, i. e. the Orthodox Professors against whom he writ, affirmed that Christ went into hell to hinder us from going thither: so was it constantly maintained in the times succeeding, by all the sound members of the Church. This appears yet more evidently by that of Athanasius, saying, 
(f) Athanas. in illud, Omnia mihi tradita sunt. & alibi.  Christ descending to hell (or Hades) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, brought us back, so losing our detention there. In which it is to be observed that he speaks this of himself and others which were then alive, and not them in hell, but yet both might and must have come there, if he had not freed them from it by his descent. And so we must interpret that of Hierom also, 
(g) Hieronyn. in Ose. c. 13.  Liberavit omnes Dominus, quando anima ejus descendit in infernum; the Lord delivered all his servants (both dead and living) when his soul descended into hell: and that of Hilary, 
(h) Hilar. de Trinitate l. 2.  Christ, descending into hell, nostra salus est, is our salvation: and that of Ambrose 
(i) Ambros. in Galat. c. 3. , descendens ad' inferos genus humanum liberavit, that Christ descending into hell delivered mankind, i. e. aswell from coming thither, as from tarrying there. Fulgentius goes to work more clearly than any of the rest before recited, and doth not only tell us this, that & descendentem ad infernum animum justi, etc. the sorrows of hell were loosed by the descending thither of Christ's righteous soul 
(k) Fulgent. ad Thrasimund. l. 3. ; but addeth, that having so loosed the sorrows or pains of hell, omnes fideles ab iisdem liberavit, he delivered all the faithful from them. But above all St. Augustine is most clear and positive in this particular, as may appear in part by that which was said before in the last Section; but far more fully in the passages which are yet to come. In all those miseries, saith he, 
(l) August. in Psalm. 85.  though we were not then, yet because our deserts were such that we should have been in them, if we had not been delivered from them; it may be rightly said we were thence delivered, Quo per liberatores (nostros) non permissi sunt perduci, whither we were not suffered to come, by our deliverers. And who these were whom he delivered in this manner, that is to say, by not permitting them to come thither at all; he tells us in another place 
(m) Id. de Gen. ad literam l. 12.33. , where we find it thus; that it is believed not without good cause that Christ's soul came into that place in which sinners are miserably tormented, Vt eos solveret a tormentis quos solvendos esse, occulta nobis sua justitia judicabat, that he might deliver them from torments, whom in his secret justice unknown to us, he thought fit to deliver. In a word thus most fully saith that Reverend Prelate, 
(n) Id. de Civi. Dei. l. 20. c. 15.  Si enim non absurde credi videtur, etc. If (saith he) it may seem to be believed without absurdity that the Saints of the Old Testament which believed in Christ to come, were in places most remote from the torments of the wicked (in locis tormentis impiorum remotissimis) and yet amongst the Inferi in the lower places, until the blood of Christ (& ad ea loca descensus) and his descent unto those places did deliver them thence: then certainly the godly believers now redeemed with the price of that bloodshed, prorsus inferos nesciunt, shall never come into that place where those inferi are, (that is to say, within the mansions below) to the time that recovering again their bodies, they do receive the blessings prepared for them. So far, and to this purpose he.  
Now by this last passage cited from the works of Augustine it is clear and evident, that in those times it was an opinion generally received in the Christian Church, and such as might be well believed (as himself acknowledgeth) without any absurdity, that the Patriarches and others of the Saints of the Old Testament, were detained in some lower places amongst the Inferi, but without any sense of those infinite torments which were endured by the wicked: and that they were detained there till the coming of Christ, till he by his descent thither did release them thence. Which opinion, as he did not very well approve of, so in regard it was so generally received, he was very tender in confuting it. All he thought fit to say was no more than this, 
(o) Id. de Gen. ad lit. l. 12. c. 33.  Illud me nondum invenisse confite●r, inferos appellatos ubi justorum animae requiescunt, that he had no where found as yet (in holy Scripture) that the place where the souls of the just did rest, was called by the name of Inferi. So wary was that Reverend and learned Prelate from pronouncing rashly in a point, wherein the general current of the Church ●eemed to be against him: and the like wariness I hope I may have leave to observe here also. For though this be the reason (as before I said) which I am to consider as a matter questionable; yet I shall consider it as a matter questionable only; I shall not dare to say it is false or impious. The joint consent of such and so many of the Ancients both Greek and Latin, which have been formerly alleged, besides others 
(p) Cyril. Hieros'. Catech. 4.  as considerable, but not here alleged, who have in terminis and expressly affirmed the same; make me hold off my hand from that presumption. The rather in regard it carries no impiety with it, nothing derogatory to the Gospel or Kingdom of Christ: but rather seems to add much lustre to our Saviour's Person, and much conduceth to the honour of the Faith and Gospel. For what can be more honourable to the Person of Christ, then that the Patriarches and other holy men of God who died under the Law, were kept from being admitted into a participation of the joys of heaven; till he by his Divine power took them by the hand, conducted them into the blessed gates of Paradise: and having overcome the sharpness of death, set open the Kingdom of Heaven unto all believers 
(q) In Cantico. Te Deum. ? What could add more unto the dignity and reputation of the Gospel of Christ, then that all such as faithfully believe the same, and frame themselves to live thereafter, should have a greater privilege than their Father Abraham, and all the rest who died in the fear of God before the coming of our Saviour; and be admitted presently to the joys of Paradise? And this is that which is affirmed by St. Hierom and some other Fathers, Ant Christum Abraham apud inferos, post Christum latro in Paradiso 
(r) Hieron. in Epitaph. Nepot. : that before CHRIST, Abraham (and the bosom of Abraham) was in the lower regions in some parts of the Inferi, but after Christ the penitent thief was admitted presently admitted into Paradise. For this, saith he, 
(s) Id. ad Dardanum. de terra vivent.  is the land of the living (in which the good things of the Lord are prepared for meek and holy men) to which before the coming of our Lord and Saviour in the flesh, neither Abraham nor Isaac nor jacob, nor the Prophets, nor other just men could attain. With whom accords St. Chrysostom also, in his Homily on the Parable of the rich man and Lazarus, Luk. 10. But here perhaps it will be said, that being both the Greek Hades and the Latin Inferi, have been before declared to be hell; and the place of torments; how can the Patriarches and other holy men of God, be said to be in or amongst the Inferi, and not participate of the torments of that wretched place? In answer whereunto it may be replied, that there might be some part or region of the Inferi, wherein the greatest, or rather the only punishment was poena damni, a want of those Celestial comforts which were reserved for them in the land of Paradise, which to a soul that longed for the sight of God, could be no small infelicity. And secondly it may be said, that though the Inferi, in itself were a place of punishment, yet God was able to command the fire that it should not burn them, and to the torments of the pit that they should not touch them. That God who so preserved the three Hebrew Salamanders in the middle of a fiery furnace 
(t) Dan. 3.27. , that the hairs of their head were not singed, nor the colour of their coats changed, nor so much as the smell of the fire passed upon them; and did so shut the mouths 
(u) Id. c. 6. v. 22.  of the ravenous Lions that they could not hurt his servant Daniel, though he was cast amongst them into their den: is also able to afford his people such a proportion of refreshing as to him seems meet, even in the middle of the flames, and in the dens of those roaring Lions who day and night have had an expectation to devour them. Nor is this all that may be said in justification and defence of those ancient Writers which have looked this way, if one did seriously set about it. For possibly they might mean no more by those expressions, of bringing back the souls of the just from Hades, then that by the descent of Christ into hell, all claim and challenge which the Devil could pretend unto them, were utterly made void and of none effect: and that our Saviour by subduing the whole forces of hell, and spoiling the powers and principalities 
(x) Coloss. 2.15.  thereof, communicated the benefit and effect of so great a triumph, aswell to those who went before, as to us that come after; assuring both, that neither hell itself nor the Rulers of it have any interest in either, or should be able from thenceforth to disturb their rest. But I pronounce not this way neither, but shall still look upon it as a matter questionable. And so I leave this point with these words of Bullinger, a man of eminent note in the Protestant Churches; Sinus Abrahae nil aliud est quam portus salutis, etc. The bosom of Abraham is nought else but the Port of Salvation; which whether it were formerly in the heavens above (an apud Inferos) or in the places under the earth, I determine not. Yea I had rather be still ignorant of it, then rashly to pronounce of that which I find not expressed in the Scripture. In these things as I will not be too curious, so neither will I define any thing therein; nor will I contend with any man about this matter. It shall suffice me to understand and confess, that the godly of the Old Testament were in a certain place of rest, and not in torments, before the Ascension of Christ, although I know not what (nor where) it was. So he, with great both piety, and Christian modesty; and with him I shut up this dispute.   

CHAP. IX. The Doctrine of the Church of England touching Christ's descent into Hell, asserted from all contrary opinions; which are here examined and disproved.  
THus have we seen the doctrine of the Primitive Church touching the Article of Christ's descent into hell, so much disputed, or indeed rather quarrelled, in these later times. Let us next look upon the Doctrine of of this Church of England, which in this point, as in all the rest which are in controversy, doth tread exactly in the steps of most pure Antiquity. And if we search into the public monuments and records thereof, we shall find this doctrine of Christ's local descent into hell, to have been retained and established amongst many other Catholic verities, ever since the first beginning of her Reformation. For in the Synod of the year 1552. being the fourth year of King Edward the sixth, it was declared and averred for the public doctrine of this Church to be embraced by all the members of the same, that the body of Christ 
(a) Articul. an. 1552. Art.  until his Resurrection lay in the grave, but that his soul being breathed out was with the spirits in prison, or hell, and preached to them, as the place of Peter doth witness, saying, For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit; By which also he went and preached to the spirits in prison, etc. 1 Pet. 3.18, 19 But being the Articles of that year were set out in Latin, take them according as they stand in the Original; Nam corpus usque ad Resurrectionem in sepulchro jacuit, Spiritus ab illo emissus cum spiritibus qui in Carcere sive in Inferno detinebantur, fuit; illisque praedicavit, ut testatur Petri locus, etc. So also in the year 1562. When Q. Elizabeth was somewhat settled in her state she caused her Clergy to be called together in a Synodical way, to the intent they might agree upon a Body or Book of Articles, for the avoiding of diversities of opinions, and for the establishing of consent touching true Religion. Who being met and having agreed upon the two first Articles 
(b) Articl. of 1562. Art. 1.2. , touching Faith in the holy Trinity, and the Word or Son of God which was made very man, and having declared in this second, that Christ who is very God and very man, did truly suffer, and was crucified, dead and buried, to reconcile us to his Father; adds for the title of the third, of the going down of Christ into hell. Which being an entire Article of itself runs thus in terminis, viz. 
(c) Arti. 3.  As Christ died for us, and was buried; so also it is to be believed that he went down into hell. Which Article with the rest being publicly agreed upon, and passed in the Convocations of both Provinces, and confirmed under the broad Seal as the law required, became the public authorized Doctrine of this Church of England: and afterwards received such countenance in the high Court of Parliament, that there was a statute made unto this purpose, 
(d) Statute 13. Elizab. c. 1.  that all who were to be admitted unto any Benefice with cure of souls, or unto any holy Orders, should publicly subscribe the same in the presence of the Bishop or Ordinary. The like care was also taken after, for subscribing to it 
(e) Canon 36. of the year 1603. , by all such who were matriculated in either of the Universities, or admitted into any College or Hall, or to any Academical degree whatsoever; and so it stands unto this day, confirmed and countenanced by as high and great authority, a● the power of the Prince, the Canons of the Church, and the Sanctions of the Civil State can give it. Nor stands it only on Record in the Book of Articles, but is thus touched in the Book of Homilies, specified and approved of 
(f) Artic. 35. of the year 1562.  for godly and wholesome Doctrine by those Articles, and ratified and confirmed together with them. Thus hath his Resurrection (saith the Homily) 
(g) Homily of the Resurrection.  wrought for us life and and righteousness; He passed through death and hell, to the intent to put us in good hope, that by his strength we shall do the same; He paid the ransom of sin that it should not be laid to our charge; He destroyed the Devil and all his tyranny, and openly triumphed over him, and took away from him all his captives, and hath raised and set them with himself among the heavenly Citizens above. So far the Homily. There was also published in the beginning of the said Queens Reign a Catechism writ in Latin by Mr. Alexander Nowell, Dean of Paul's, and publicly authorized to be taught in all the Grammar Schools of this kingdom, (though not by such a sacred and supreme authority as the books of Articles and Homilies had been before): in which the doctrine of Christ's descent into hell, is thus delivered, viz. 
(h) Cathechism. Alex. Nowell. , That as Christ's body was laid in the Bowels of the earth, so his soul separated from his body, descended (ad inferos) to hell, and with all the force and efficacy of his death so pierced unto the dead, atque inferos adeo ipsos, and even to the spirits in hell, that the souls of the unfaithful perceived the condemnation of their infidelity to be most sharp and just; ipseque inferorum Princeps Satan, and Satan himself the Prince of hell saw all the power of his tyranny and of darkness, to be weakened, broken, and destroyed; and chose the dead, who whilst they lived believed in Christ understood the work of their Redemption to be performed, and felt the fruit and force thereof, with a most sweet and certain comfort. So that the doctrine of Christ's descent into hell being thus positively delivered in the Articles, and Homilies, and Catechism publicly authorized to be taught in Schools; and being thus solemnly confirmed and countenanced both by Laws and Canons, and by the subscriptions of all the Clergy and other learned men of this Realm of England: how great must we conceive the impudence to be of the Romish Gagger 
(i) Gag. for the Gospel. , who charged this upon this Church, that we deny the descent of Christ into hell. Nor do I wonder less at the improvidence of those who were then in authority, in licensing Mr. Roger's comment on this Book of Articles, and suffering him to put it forth with the glorious title of being published by authority; considering that he permits all people in this Church and State, to put what sense they will upon the Article, so they keep the words. Which as it gives a great advantage to the Papists, in making them report with the greater confidence, that this Church alloweth not of a local descent into hell, contrary to the doctrine of the primitive times; so have they charged it on us in some solemn 
(k) Conference with Fisher, etc.  conferences more than once or twice.  
Nor doth the Church of England stand alone in this interpretation of the Article, according to the literal and Grammatical sense, but is therein countenanced and backed by the most eminent Doctors of the Protestant and reformed Churches. And first we will begin with Luther, who speaking of those words of the royal Psalmist, Thou shalt not leave my soul in hell, and of those foolish glosses which were made upon them in those times; adviseth thus 
(l) Luther in Psal. 16. , that despising all such frivolous and impious trifles, we simply understand the words of the Prophet, (of the being of Christ's soul in hell) as they were simply and plainly spoken; and if we cannot understand them, that howsoever we do faithfully believe the same. Pomeranus commenting on the same words of the Prophet, thus infers thereon 
(m) Pom. in Psal. 16. , Here hast thou that Article of our faith, Christ's descent into hell. If thou ask what he did there? I answer, that he delivered thence not the Father's only, but all the faithful, from the beginning of the world to the end thereof; nor out of Limbus only, but out of the lowest and neathermost hell, to which all were condemned. David Chytreus to this purpose 
(n) Dau. Chyt. in Symbol. , that we are to understand this Article of the Creed, plainly and simply as the words do seem to import, and to resolve that the Son of God truly descended into hell to deliver us thence, to which place we were condemned for sin in Adam; as also from the power and tyranny of the Devil, which held us captive in the same: and for the proof hereof he referreth himself to Hierome, Augustine, and Fulgentius, whose words he quoteth. Vrbanus Regius saith the same 
(o) Vrb. Regi. in Catechis. minore. , The Church (saith he) delivereth out of holy Scripture, that Christ after he was dead on the Cross, descended also into hell, to suppress Satan and hell, to which we were condemned by the just judgement of God, and to spoil and destroy the kingdom of death. More plainly Henricus Mollerus thus, 
(p) Moller. in Psal. 36.  The descent of Christ to hell, being one of the Articles of the Creed, we understand simply without any allegory, and believe that Christ truly descended to the lower parts of the earth, as St. Paul speaketh Ephes. 4. It is enough for us to believe, which Austin affirmeth in his Epistle to Dardanus, that Christ therefore descended that he might help those which were to be holpen. Of the same mind as touching the true and real descent into hell, are Westhmerus in Psal. 16. Hemingius in Coloss. c. 2. Wolfgangus Musculus in Psal. 16. and the whole body of the Lutheran Divines in their book of Concord, Artic. 9 But none more positively and significantly then Zacharias Scilterus, though perhaps of less eminent note then those before, who informs us thus 
(q) Zach. Scil. de regno Christ. , The descent of Christ to hell, whereof mention is made in the Apostles Creed after the death and burial of Christ, is to be understood simply and without Allegory, according to the literal sense, of the manifestation and declaration of Christ's victory no less glorious than terrible made to the Devils in hell, or in the place of the damned; and of Christ's expugning, spoiling, disarming, captivating the power of Satan, and of his destroying hell, and everting the whole kingdom of darkness, and of his delivering us from the pains of death and eternal damnation, and out of the pains of hell. Nor is this only the opinion of the Lutheran Doctors, but of those also which in matter of the Sacrament and some other points, adhere rather to the Doctrine of Zuinglius, Calvin, and those other Churches, who commonly do call themselves the reformed Churches.  
And first we will begin with Peter Martyr, not only because first in time, but because purposely sent for hither by Archbishop Cranmer, to travel in the great work of reformation, which was then in hand. As touching Christ's soul (saith he) 
(s) Pet. Mart. Exposit. Symbol.  as soon as it departed from the body it rested not idle, but descended ad inferos unto hell; and certainly both the one and the other company as well of the godly as the damned found the presence of it. For the souls of the faithful were much comforted, and gave God thanks for delivering them by the hands of this Mediator, and performing that which had so long before been promised: and those which were adjudged to everlasting damnation, animae Christi adventum praesenseru●t, perceived the coming of Christ's soul (with as much discomfort).  
Aretius' next, declaring that the Article of Christ's descent into hell 
(t) Aret. Problem. loco. 16. , is delivered in plain terms in holy Scriptures; and then repeating many other senses which had been obtruded on the Article, he rejects them all, and thus produceth, Quare mea sententia est, etc. It is therefore mine opinion that Christ descended into hell, after he had yielded his soul on the Cross into the hand of God his Father; and hell in this place we affirm to be the very place appointed for the souls of the damned, even for Satan and all his members.  
Finally, Zanchius 
(u) Zanch. in Coloss. c. 2.  doth not only hold for his own particular, that though the powers and principalities spoken of Coloss. 2. were vanquished and conquered on the Cross by Christ; yet that the triumph there also mentioned was not performed till Christ in his soul entered the kingdom of hell as a glorious Victor, bringing them out of their infernal Kingdom, and carrying them along in the air in the sight of all the Angels and blessed souls: but doth affirm that the Fathers for the most part were of that opinion, Et ex nostris non pauci neque vulgares, and of their own Expositors not a few, and those no mean persons. So that in him, we have not only his own judgement & opinion, but the agreement and consent of almost all the rest of the considerable Divines of the reformed Churches.  
Yet notwithstanding this agreement and consent both of the Ancient Fathers and the Later writers, this Article of Christ's descent hath not wanted those, who have endeavoured with all care & diligence either to make it of no authority by expunging it out of the old received Creeds, or to dispute as well the possibility, as the use and pertinency of the said descent, by pressing it with many studied Objections to that end and purpose; or finally to put such a sense upon it, as is utterly inconsistent with the meaning of it, and as destructive in a manner as the first attempt, of making it no part of the ancient Creeds. And first it is objected out of Ruffinus that this clause of Christ's descent into hell, was not in his time in the Creed of the Church of Rome, nor in those of the Eastern Churches. His words are these 
(x) Ruffinus in Symbol. , Sciendum est quod in Ecclesiae Romanae Symbolo non habetur additum [descendit ad inferos], sed neque Orientis Ecclesiis. This we acknowledge to be true; what then? Therefore, say they, it needs must follow, that it was not in the Creed at all, until some time after. But this by no means can be gathered out of Ruffians words: who is not to be understood in the sense they dream of; or if he be, shall presently confute himself without further trouble. And first Ruffinus could not say that the clause of Christ's descent into hell, was neither in the Apostles Creed before his time, nor reckoned for a part thereof by the Church of Rome, or by any Churches of the East. For long before the times he lived in, Ignatius Bishop of Antioch the most famous City of the East, repeated it as a part of the Creed 
(y) Ignat. Epist. ad Trallian. ; the like did chrysostom 
(z) Chrys. Hom. 2. in Symb.  one of the Presbyters of that Church, and Cyril 
(a) Cyril in Catechism. 4.  Bishop of Jerusalem, both living in the same time that Ruffinus lived in. Nyssen, and Nazianzen, and Basil, his contemporaries, or not long before him, do reckon it amongst the Articles of the Christian faith; and give us the true orthodox sense thereof, as before was shown: all of them very famous Bishops of the lesser Asia, one of the most considerable parts of the Eastern Church. The like doth Epiphanius 
(b) Epiphan. haeres. 69.  for the Isle of Cyprus, and Cyril 
(c) Cyril de recta fide. l. 2.  for the Patriarchate of Alexandria: whereof this last was the great ruler of the Egyptian, Aethiopian, and Arabian Churches; the other though within the Patriarchate of Antiochia, yet was sui juris 
(d) Concil. Eph. Can. 8. , an Independent as it were, and of equal privilege at home. So also for the African and other Churches of the Western world, it is most evident by that which hath been cited from Fulgentius, Augustine, Ambrose, Tertullian, Cyprian, and all the rest of note and eminency, that this of the descent into hell, was reckoned for an Article of the Creed in those parts and times, in which they severally and respectively did live and flourish. And so it was esteemed in Rome itself when Ruffinus lived, and in the Church of Aquileia not far from Rome, where he was a Presbyter. For otherwise neither he himself had so reputed it, nor commented thereupon as upon the rest: nor had St. Hierome being at that time a Presbyter of the Church of Rome, so ●ar avowed this Article of the descent into hell, or given us so much help and furtherance to the right understanding thereof, had it been reputed by that Church for no part or Article of the Common Creed, as we see he did 
(e) Vid. Ch. 6. . Thus than Ruffinus did not mean, and indeed he could not, that this Article of the descent into hell, was not accounted for an Article of the Apostles Creed, either by those of Rome, or the Eastern Churches. No such matter verily. His meaning is, that whereas in those times divers several Churches, and many times particular persons of rank and quality, did use to publish several Creeds to serve as testimonies of their right belief upon occasion of some new emergent heresies: the Creed or Symbol made for the Church of Rome, and some of those which were in use in the Eastern parts, did omit this Article. For well we know it was omitted both in the Constantinopolitan and Nicene Creeds, which were of so much reputation in all parts of Christendom; as being a point about the which no stir or Controversy had been raised. Nor doth Ruffinus say, if we mark him well, that the Church of Rome denied this clause to be part of the Apostles Creed (which he must either say or nothing which will do them good) but that it was not in Ecclesiae Romanae Symbolo, in the Creed or Symbol, made for the use of the particular Church of Rome, for some particular occasion; such as was that of Damasus in St. Hieromes works, where indeed it is not. So that the omitting of this Article in the Creeds of those particular Churches, which Ruffinus speaks of, shows rather that it was received in all parts of Christendom with such a general consent and unanimity, that it was needless to insert it in those Creeds, because no controversy or debate had been raised about it. For otherwise it must needs follow by this Argument, that being there is no mention of Christ's death in the Nicene Creed, nor of his burial in the Creed of Athanasius, nor of the Communion of the Saints in the Constantinopolitan, nor of many of the last Articles in the Creed of Damasus (not to descend to more particulars) therefore those Articles and clauses were not to be found in such copies of the Apostles Creed, as were commended to the use of God's people, within the Patriarchates of Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, or the City of Nice, or any of those numerous Churches over all the world, where those particular Creeds were received and welcomed.  
This project therefore failing, as we see it doth, the Devils next great care hath been to dispute down the authority and effect thereof, such a descent as is delivered and maintained by the Church of England, being neither possible nor pertinent, as is objected. And first, say some, it is not possible. Why so? Because say they 
(f) Luk. 23.43. , our Saviour promised the penitent Thief, that the same day his soul should be with him in Paradise. What then? Therefore Christ's soul being to go that day to Paradise, could neither go to hell that day, nor the two days after. An argument which hath as many faults almost as it hath words. For first our Saviour was not of such slow dispatch as these men would have him, but that he might carry the thiefs soul to Paradise, and yet show himself the same day to the fiends in hell. That both were done on the same day, Vigilius one of the ancients doth affirm expressly 
(g) Vigil. cont. Eutych. l. 2. , Constat dominum nostrum Jesum Christum sexta feria crucifixum, etc. It is most manifest, saith he, that our Lord Jesus Christ was crucified on the sixth day, that on the same day he descended into hell, on the same day he lay in the grave, & ipsa die latroni dixisse, and on the same said to the Thief, This day thou shalt be with me in Paradise. All this might very well be done by our Lord Christ jesus, within less time than the compass of a natural day, unless we measure his omnipotence by our own infirmities. But yet to take away all scruples which may hence arise, St. Augustine and some others of the Fathers have resolved it thus; viz. that when Christ said unto the Thief, This day thou shall be with me in Paradise, he spoke not of his manhood but of his Godhead 
(h) Aug. Epist. 57 ad Dardan. . And this saith Augustine doth free the Article from all ambiguities. But this he doth declare more plainly in another place, saying, that he who said unto the Thief hanging on the Cross 
(i) Id. in johan. Tract. 3. , This day thou shalt be with me in Paradise, according to his manhood (or humane nature) had his soul that day in hell, and his flesh in the grave, but according to his Godhead, was most undoubtedly in Paradise. Titus Bostrenus saith the same, an Author not of such authority, but of more antiquity then St. Augustine: How (saith he) did our Saviour perform this promise made unto the Thief, Hodie mecum eris in Paradiso 
(k) Titus Bost. in Luk. 23. ? And thereunto he answereth thus, Christ taken down from his Cross was in hell according to his soul, and nevertheless by the power of his divinity he brought the thief into Paradise. Thus Damascen also for the Greek Fathers 
(l) Damas. in Homil. de sancti. sublato. , The same Christ is adored in Heaven as God, together with the Father and the holy Ghost. And he as man lay in the Sepulchre with his body, and abode in hell with his soul, and gave entrance to the Thief into Paradise by his divinity, which cannot be comprehended in any place. Or if we think the journey from the Cross to Paradise, and from thence to hell, to be too great for our Redeemer to dispatch in a day, (which by the way were a fine piece of infidelity) what hinders it, but that having for a day refreshed his wearied soul in the joys of Paradise, he might afterwards go down to hell to pursue his Conquest. For though the great Cardinal affirm 
(m) Bellar. de Anima Christi. l. 4. c. 15. , Animam Christi triduo esse in cord terrae, that the soul of Christ continued as long in hell as his body lay in the grave; yet herein he deserts those worthies of the former times, whose dictates he would fain be thought to adhere unto. For Anselm, once Archbishop of Canterbury, though a Post-natus in regard of the Ancient Fathers, yet far more ancient and of no less abilities than Bellarmine, was persuaded otherwise. Who ask in the way of discourse or dialogue 
(n) Ansel. in Elucidario. , Whither Christ's soul went after his death, he answereth, to the heavenly Paradise, as he said to the Thief, This day, etc. When then to hell? He answereth at midnight before his resurrection; at which hour as the Angel destroyed Egypt, so at the same Christ spoilt hell, and made their darkness as bright as day. But lest the Cardinal should think it a disparagement unto him to be counterballanced by a writer of so late a date, let him take this of Augustine 
(o) Aug. cont. Felician. c. 15.  for a farewell, and so much good do it him. Si igitur mortuo corpore ad Paradisum anima mox vocatur, quemquamne adhuc tam impium credimus, qui dicere audeat quod Anima Servatoris nostri triduo illo corporeae mortis custodiae mancipetur? If then the body of the Thief dying, saith that reverend Father, his soul was presently taken into Paradise; shall we think any man so wicked (ware that Sr. Cardinal) as to dare say, that the soul of our Saviour during the three days that his body was dead, was restrained in the custody of hell? So that we see there is no such impossibility, as hath been objected, but that our Lord and Saviour might descend into hell, though he was the same day with the thief in Paradise. As little doth it follow from their other argument 
(p) Ap. B. Bilson. p. 548. , that Christ commended his soul into the hands of his Father; and therefore it could not be in hell. For certainly these men must think the hands of God to be very short, and the power of the Devil over great, if any part of hell should be out of God's reach, or that he could command nothing there but by Satan's leave. Christ's soul wheresoever it was, was in God's protection, and so by necessary consequence in the hands of God, there being no place in heaven or hell exempted from the power of the Lord Almighty. David had else deceived both himself and us, in saying that if he went down to hell, he should find God there. And therefore we need say no more unto this Objection, but that which Gregory Nyssen said in former times, as by way of prevention; viz. 
(q) Nyssen in illud, Exivit sanguis & aqua.  that the soul of Christ, commended into his Father's hands, went down to hell, quum ita illi bonum & commodum visum esset, when it seemed convenient to himself that it should so do; that he might publish salvation to the souls in hell, and be Lord over quick and dead, and spoil hell, and might prepare a way for man to return to life, after he himself had been the first fruits, the first born from the dead. And this (saith he) may be perceived and proved by many places of Scripture.  
And I the rather have made use of those words of Nyssen in answer unto that Objection (if it may be called one) because it satisfyeth in part another of their doughty Arguments touching the use and pertinency of Christ's descent▪ For if, say they, there be no certain benefit redounding to the godly by Christ's going to hell, then out of doubt he went not thither 
(r) Ap. E. Bilson. p. 666. : so far they say exceeding well. But then they take (without proof) as a matter granted, that no such benefit redounded to the godly by it; and therefore they conclude what they list themselves. This is the sum of what they say as touching the impertinency of Christ's descent into hell; and this is as easy to be answered, as that of the impossibility which we had before. Three special motives which induced our Saviour unto this descent, we showed you from the Fathers in the former Chapter; that is to say, the full and final overthrow of the powers of Satan, the bringing thence the Ancient Patriarches and others which died before the preaching of our Saviour's Gospel: and finally the delivering us from the holds thereof that we go not thither. And do they think that none of these are any matter of certain benefit to the godly man? Or do they think the publishing of salvation to the souls in hell, the making of our Saviour to be Lord over quick and dead, the spoiling of hell, and the preparing of a way for man to return to life, which we find in Nyssen, administereth no use of consolation to the godly mind? Besides there were some other ends of Christ's descent into hell, than the procuring of some certain benefits to the godly only: which if they should deny, as perhaps they may, they will condemn therein the best Protestant writers. Aretius, one of name and credit in the reformed Churches, gives us three reasons of the Lords descent into hell, whereof there is but one which concerns the godly 
(s) Aretius' Problem. loco 16. . The first (saith he) is for the Reprobates, that they might know he was now come, of whose coming they had so often heard, but neglected it with great contempt. The second is, that Satan might assuredly know that this Christ whom he had tempted in the desert, and delivered unto death by the hand of the jews, was the very Messiah, and the seed promised to the woman. And the third was in reference to the Elect, that Satan might see he had now no right, no not so much as to their bodies, which Christ hereafter would be pleased to restore to life. Mr. Nowell, as before we saw, gives three other reasons, that is to say 
(t) Nowell in Catechism. , First, that the souls of the faithless might perceive the condemnation of their unbelief to be just and righteous. Secondly, that Satan the chief Prince of hell, might see all the power of his tyranny, to be weakened and broken, nay utterly ruined. And thirdly, that the dead who in their life time believed in Christ, might perceive the work of their Redemption to be now finished, and find the force and fruit thereof with most certain comfort. But against this it is objected, that Christ obtained this victory against hell and Satan, and all the benefits redounding to the godly by it, by his death and passion on the Cross; and therefore it was needless that on those occasions (which seem most considerable in this business) he should make a journey unto hell. To which it is replied two ways, First, that it belongeth not to us to know the depth of God's counsels 
(u) B. Bilson. , and the reasons of Christ's doings in every thing, as if we were to call him to a strict account of all his actions: and that considering how the Scriptures do so clearly testify that his soul was not left in hell, we are not to reject this clause either as superfluous or impertinent, although we cannot tell precisely the main end and purpose, why he was pleased to descend thither. And secondly, that though the victory against Hell and Satan was perfected upon the Cross, yet the manifestation of the same to the souls of the damned, and the triumph which was due upon it, over Satan and all the powers of darkness, was not, and could not be performed but in hell alone. We showed you this before from Zanchius, a moderate and learned man, where he affirmeth 
(x) Zanch. in Coloss. 2. , according to the mind of the best interpreters, that though those enemies were vanquished on the Cross by Christ, yet the triumph for the same was not performed until he (forced and) entered the kingdom of hell as a glorious Conqueror. Nay more than so, Christ's victory over death and hell, if Athanasius may be credited, as I think he may, was of too great moment and importance, to be dispatched in one place, and by one act only. Therefore saith he, 
(y) Athanas de incarnal.  As Christ performed the condemnation of sin on the Earth, the abolition of the curse on the Cross, and the redemption of corruption in the grave; so he accomplished the dissolution of death in hell; omnia loca permeans, that going unto every place, he might in every place work man's salvation. So that Christ's victory not being complete, as this Father thinketh; and the triumph due upon the victory not to be celebrated any where so properly as in hell itself: the ancients did not hold his descent into hell to be very necessary for the godly, but much unto the honour and glory of our blessed Saviour; and to that end joined it together with the Article of his resurrection, as being the first part of his exaltation. For as George Mylius a learned Lutheran very well observeth, there are two things to be considered in the Article of Christ's descent into hell 
(z) Geo. Mylius in Aug. Confess. Art. 3. . First, that it was no metaphorical, but a true and real descent, whereby our Saviour did descend to the lower parts of the earth, Eph. 4. ipsasque damnatorum sedes, even to the mansions of the damned: and secondly, that this Article is no part of his passion and humiliation, but of his victory and triumph.  
So then, the Article standing as it did in all ancient Copies notwithstanding all these vain assaults; and the doctrine in the same contained being neither impossible or impertinent, as it was pretended: the next attempt made by the Adversaries of the same, was to put such a sense or senses on it, as might make it either useless to the Church of Christ, or inconsistent with that meaning in which it had been taken generally by the Catholic Church. And though the Cardinal would very fain impose this project on the Protestant Doctors 
(a) Bellarm. de Anima Christi. l. 4. c. 7, 8, 9 , and make them the first Authors of those devises, by which the true meaning of this Article hath been impugned, and the Article itself as good as cast out of the Creed: yet by his leave, he must ascribe this practice (if it were a practice) to his great Masters and Dictator's in the Schools of Rome. For sure it is, Durandus one of their great School men before Luther's time, denied expressly 
(b) Durand. in 3. d. 22. q. 3.  that the soul of Christ descended into hell, secundum substantiam suam, really and according to the substance of it; but doth restrain the same ad effectus quosdam, according to some certain effects and influences, as the illuminating and beatifying of the Saints in Limbo. Thus much the Cardinal himself doth confess ingenuously 
(c) Bellarm. de Anima Christi. l. 4. c. 15. ; and against that opinion of Durandus doth put up this Thesis, viz. Animam Christi proprie & reipsa descendisse ad inferos, that is to say, that the soul of Christ really and in very deed did descend into hell; which he confirms by many strong and weighty reasons. And sure it is that before him Aquinas himself the great Master of the Roman Schools did put such a sense upon the Article, as utterly disagreeth with that of the Ancient Fathers, whose doctrines they would make us weak men believe, they do so tenaciously, if not pertinaciously, embrace and defend. For whereas the Fathers do maintain a descent into hell, and do expound themselves that they mean by hell, the place and mansions of the damned; Aquinas 
(d) Aquin. part. 3. qu. 52. Art. 2.  states the question thus, that Christ descended only unto Limbus patrum, according to a real presence, secundum realem praesentiam, as his words there are, and to all other places of the infernal pit, secundum effectus tantum, only according to the influence and effects thereof. And in this point he hath been so close followed by the most part of the Schoolmen, that Bellarmine conceived it neither fit nor safe to run directly and expressly against the stream: and therefore goeth no further than probabile est 
(e) Bellarm. de Anima Christi. l. 4. c. 16. , that in most likelihood our Saviour's soul descended really to all parts of hell. So that although the current of Antiquity run an other way, and that the Fathers do deliver it for a Catholic verity that the soul of Christ did really and locally descend to all parts of hell, even to the mansions of the damned, as before was said: yet if Aquinas and the Schoolmen like their own way better, 'tis but probable at the most, a matter of probability only, and no more than so. Such is the great respect they bear, after all their brags, to the traditions of the Fathers. Which being so, the Cardinal had but little reason to impose it on the leading men of the reformed Churches, that they perverted the true meaning of the Article by their corrupt glosses and interpretations; since the first wrestling of it from the native sense, came principally and originally from the Church of Rome. But far less reason had he to impose upon them a more gross absurdity; in making Calvin and Brentius both to deliver this interpretation of it, that to descend into hell was nothing else, but to be utterly annihilated, and extinct ●or ever 
(f) Id. ibid. c. 7. . A folly shall I call it, or a frenzy rather, which never came within their dreams, for as much as doth appear by their works and writings, from whence the Cardinal must collect it. Nor was the scene so well contrived as it should have been for the acting of this grand Imposture, the book of Calvins which it cited for the proof thereof being that entitled Psychopannychia purposely written (as appeareth by the Preface of it) against the Anabaptists of those times, by whom indeed that monstrous Paradox had been lately published.  
This therefore being flung aside as a fraud or slander, the first of those three new constructions, which have been made of this descent into hell by the writers of the reformed Churches; is that thereby the Authors of the Creed whosoever they were, meant nothing but our Saviour's burial. Bucer, I take it, was the first, (though otherwise a moderate man, and one not very apt to follow any new devise) that puts this sense upon the Article. Ad infernum descendere, nil aliud est quam recendi corpus sub terra 
(g) Bucer. in Mat. 27. : to deseend into hell, (saith he) is nothing else but for the body to be buried under the ground. And presently he gives this reason why he so expounds it, Sheol enim pro quo in scriptures nos fere infernum legimus, sepulchrum significat, that the word Sheol in the Hebrew, which in the Scriptures we interpret commonly by that of hell, doth properly signify the grave. What the word Sheol signifieth in the Hebrew tongue is not now the business, but what was meant by the Apostles in the Greek word Hades, by which St. Peter did translate it: and that we proved before in the former Chapter to be meant literally of hell, of the place of torments. Or were it so that the word Hades might be used in some places to express the grave, yet were it very improbable, that descendere in infernum, in this place of the Creed, should signify no more then to be buried. And in my mind Calvin doth reason very strongly against this construction, where he affirms that what an unlikely thing it must needs be thought, that in so short an Abstract of the Christian faith, that of our Saviour's burial should be twice expressed: First in plain terms, and after by a figurative Metaphorical speech 
(h) Calv. Instit. l. 22. c. 16. . Non est verisimile irrepere potuisse superfluam ejusmodi battologiam, in compendium hoc, ubi summatim quam fieri potuit paucissimus verbis, praecipua fidei capita notantur, So he, judiciously and to the purpose. But then withal I needs must say, that though Calvin did reject this interpretation, as inconsistent with the nature of so short a Summary; having indeed a new devise of his own to set up in stead of it: yet gave he much encouragement to others to expound it so, who were too apt to learn from so great a Master. For whereas in the old translation of the Psalms of David, which has so long been generally received in the Western Church, the words ran thus, Non derelinques animam meam in inferno, i. e. thou shalt not leave my soul in hell: Calvin in his translation was so bold as to change it thus 
(i) Id. in Ps. 16. , Non deseres animam meam in sepulchro, thou shalt not leave my soul in the grave or sepulchre: and then by soul, expounds himself to mean the whole person of David. Which coming unto Bezas' hands, he saw no reason (as indeed there was not) but that he might make as bold with St. Peter in the book of the Acts, as Calvin did with David in the book of Psalms. And therefore when he first put out his new translation of the new Testament, he thus translated Peter's words into calvin's meaning, and made the passage to run thus in Terminis, without any disguise, Non relinques corpus meum in sepulchro, i. e. thou shalt not leave my body in the grave, nor suffer thine holy one to see corruption. But after finding how great clamour he had raised thereby, in the next edition of that work he retained in words the old translation, Non relinques animam meam in inferno, but in his Notes or Annotations on the same did declare expressly 
(k) Beza in Act. 2.27. , that by infernus there he did mean sepulchrum, and by anima the whole person whether Christ's or David's: and then the gloss upon the text must in brief be this, Non relinques animam meam in inferno, i. e. Non relinques corpus meum in sepulchro. A gloss like that of Orleans, which corrupts the text: and brings into my mind that with which we use sometimes to jeer the old glossary on the Canon-laws, Statuimus, i. e. abrogamus, that is to say, we do ordain, that is, we annul or abrogate. A gloss not much unlike unto that of Bellarmine; and hard it is to say which of the two is most absurd: who being asked this question by some Protestant Doctors, viz. to whom the Pope should make complaint when offence is given him, if he be so supreme in the Church of Christ, as they say he is, returns this answer thereunto, Papa potest dicere Ecclesiae, i. e. sibi ipsi 
(l) Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. l. 2. c. 19 , the Pope may tell the Church, that is, himself. And indeed this interpretation of the Article seemed as absurd as either of these two fine glosses; insomuch that Beza lived to see it every were deserted, in some parts exploded. And now, and long before these times, (as Aretius very well observeth) Tota Ecclesia ubique terrarum, etc. 
(m) Aret. Problem. loco. 16.  The whole Church thoughout the world doth receive this Article (all opposition notwithstanding) Et diversum a sepultura recitat, and doth recite it as a different point from that of the burial.  
Now that which Calvin said in the former case, touching the unlikelyhood and improbability that in so short a Summary of the Christian faith, the same thing should be twice repeated, first in plain terms, and presently in the very next words in a figurative speech: the same may be returned to a second construction, made by some late Divines on the present Article. Who willing to be singular, and in a way by themselves, and finding that it would not down amongst knowing men, that Christ's descent into hell should be all one with his burial: have ransacked all the Hebrew Rabbins to find out their conceptions on the Hebrew Sheol; and all the old Greek Philosophers and ancient Poets, to find what they intended by the Greek word Hades. And having made a general muster of collections out of several Heathenish and jewish writers, extracted out of them this sense of the present Article; that is to say, that by Christ's descending into hell is meant nothing else 
(n) Feild. of the Ch. l. 5. c. 19 et multi alii.  but his going down into the Chambers of death, and his continuance in the state of separation from his body for the space of three days under the power and dominion of death. Which though it came after the conceit of Calvin who maketh the descent of Christ into hell, to be the sufferings of hell pains in his soul, in his Agony, and upon the Cross; yet we have joined it to the former, as being at the furthest cousin german to it, if not the same device clothed in other words. For what else is it to be dead and buried, but to descend down into the chambers of death? and what else to go down to the chambers of death, but to be dead and buried, as our Saviour was? What need was there that when the Creed had specified his death and burial, and his lying in the grave three days, in as plain terms as possibly the wit of man could devise to put it in: there should a clause be added in the next words following, to signify his going down to the Chambers of death, a three day's separation of his soul and body; and that in words so figurative and Metaphorical, that all the Lexicons and Grammars of both the languages must be searched and studied, before we can find out what we are to trust to. Assuredly it was not the Apostles purpose to set men's wits upon the rack to find out their meaning; or to make the Creed, which they intended for the use of the simplest sort, tormentum ingeniorum, a torture to the brain of the ablest Scholar; or to express themselves in such difficult terms that men must go to School to the old Greek Poets, and the late jewish Rabbins, before they can attain to the meaning of them. As if there were no way to become a Christian, but to be first an exact Critic, a professed Philologer. Yet this hath been the Helena of our greatest Clerks, of none more preciously beloved then by the Bishop of Meuth, who in his Answer to the Jesuits challenge hath spent a great deal of unfortunate pains to no other purpose, but to cross the current of Antiquity, together with the authorized doctrine of the Church of England. Concerning which I shall not need to say more now, then what was touched upon before, touching the unliklyhood of improbability of using such obscure and figurative expressions in so plain a form, in the which all things else must be understood in the literal sense; and the repeating of the same thing twice in so short an Abstract, not capable of a Tautology though in divers words. And as for the far fetching of Theological and Ecclesiastical notions, out of the works and writings of old obsolete Authors; it is a devise not known nor heard of in the Christian Church, till these Critical times; nor very well approved in this neither by judicious men. And therefore for a full and final answer to this last conceit, I shall use this caution of Aquinas 
(p) Aquin. 2.2 d. qu. 92. Art. 1. , viz. Aliud est etymologia nominis, & aliud significatio nominis, etc. that is to say, that in words we must not so much look upon their original, exact and precise signification, or derivation, as that whereto they are by ordinary use applied. And unto this shall add the counsel and advise of a grave Divine, a late learned member of the Church 
(q) D. jackson on the Creed. l. 7.3. , viz. That he who hopeth to attain the true knowledge of the principles of the Christian faith, must either use the help of some Lexicon peculiar to Divinity, or make one of his own: it being an easier thing (saith he) to learn the terms of Law or Physic out of Thomasius or Rider's Dictionaries, then to know the true Theological use and meaning of many principal terms in the old or new Testament, out of Stephanus or Pagninus his Thesaurus, though both of them most excellent writers in their kind. Which I conceive to be as fit and full an answer unto this second exposition of the descent into hell, drawn from the Greek Hades, and the Hebrew Sheol, as the merit of it doth require. Only take here the substance of my former answer in these words of Calvin 
(r) Calv. Instit. l. 2. c. 16 § 8. . Quantae oscitantiae fuisset rem minime difficilem verbis expeditis & claris demonstratam, obscuriore deinde verborum complexu indicare magis quam declarare? How great a folly must we think it (in the compilers of the Creed whosoever they were) to lay down that in difficult and intricate phrases, which had been formerly delivered in most clear and significant terms; especially considering that when two several forms of speech are joined together to express one thing, the latter commonly doth use to explain the former.  
We now proceed to that interpretation of this part of the Creed which hath found most followers, and hath been most insisted on by some late Divines, as the undoubted sense and meaning of the present words: though to attain unto this meaning they must allow themselves both Metaphors and other figures; which (as before was shown) this short form admits not. And this interpretation found the better welcome, not because any way more probable than the rest of the new devices, but in regard it came from Calvin, whose reputation was so high, and his authority so great amongst them, that (as one 
(s) Hooker in his Preface. n. 2▪  very well observeth) they were esteemed to be the most perfect Divines who were most skilful in his writings, which were almost grown the very Canon by which both Discipline and Doctrine were to be judged. Now Calvin seeing how absurd and inconvenient it must needs be thought, to make the descent of Christ into hell, to be nothing else but his burial; and that of his descent into the chambers of death, and his continuance of separation from his body, being then found out: fell on a fancy which might seem to have more affinity to his descent unto the very place of torments, the habitations of the damned, though to say truth, it was not so much properly a descending of his soul to the torments of hell, as an ascending of the torments of hell, to find a place in his soul. To bring this in, he first declareth that Christ had done nothing for us in the way of redemption if he had died no other than a bodily death; and therefore that it was necessary he should undergo divinae ultionis severitatem 
(t) Calv. Instit. l. 2. c. 16. , the severity of the divine vengeance? Then he infers, that to this end he was to struggle cum inferorum copiis, aeternaeque mortis horrore, with the infernal powers of hell, and the horrors that attend on eternal death, and to submit himself unto all those punishments which the most wicked souls are condemned to suffer, the eternity thereof excepted only: that in this sense he may be truly said to descend into hell, in regard he suffered all those torments, nay that death itself, which are by God inflicted upon wicked men; dirosque in anima cruciatus damnati & perditi hominis pertulerit, and felt most sensibly in his soul those miserable torments of a man utterly forlorn and damned to the pit of hell: that being thus forsaken and estranged from the sight of God, he was so cast down, as in the anguish of his spirit to cry out afflictively, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me; as finding in himself omnia irati & punientis Dei signa, all the sure tokens of an angry and avenging God: finally, that the fear and sorrow which did overwhelm him in the Garden, his fervent prayer, his Agony and bloody sweat, were nothing but the signs and evidences of those horrid and unspeakable torments (those diros & horribiles cruciatus, as he calls them there) which he then suffered in his soul. And what could all this be, but the pains of hell? This he resolves to be the meaning of the Article, condemning all exceptions which are or may be made against it, either as frivolous and ridiculous (Sect. 10.) or to proceed ex malitia magis quam imscitia 
(u) Id. ibid. § 11. , rather from malice then from ignorance, and all that hath been said unto the contrary to be nothing but mere slander and calumniations; and being most extremely pleased to see how those who did oppose him knew not where to fasten, but were compelled to fly from one thing to another. This is the sum of his dispute, the substance of that dangerous innovation in the Christian faith, which was by him first published for a truth undoubted, and after taken up upon his Authority without further questioning or debate. Which as it generally prevailed in most places else, so did it no where find more fast friends and followers, then in this unhappy Church of England: where it became in fine to be accounted the sole Orthodox Doctrine, vented in Pulpits and in Catechisms 
(x) B. Bilson in his Epistle to King james. , that the death of Christ upon the Cross, and his blood shed for the remission of our sins were the least cause and means of our Redemption; but that he did and ought to suffer the death of the s●ul, and those very pains which the damned souls in hell do suffer, before we could be ransomed from the wrath of God; and that this was that descent into hell which in our Creed we are taught to believe. A doctrine so directly contrary unto that of the Church of England, delivered in her Articles and Books of Homilies, solemnly authorized and ratified as before was said, that Dr. Bilson the Reverend and learned Bishop of Winton then being, thought himself obliged as well to undeceive the people, as to assert the ancient doctrine of the Church: And to that end, delivered in a Sermon at St. Paul's Cross London, what he conceived to be the tenet of the Scriptures in this particular, according to the Exposition of the holy Fathers. Which as it first occasioned some unsavoury Pamphlets, and afterwards some set discourses to be writ against him: so it necessitated him in his own defence to set out that laborious work entitled, 
(y) Printed at London, 1604.  The survey of Christ's sufferings for man's Redemption, and of his descent to Hades or Hell for our deliverance; I must confess myself indebted for the most part of those helps which I have had in the true stating both of this and the former Article. Thus having shown who was the Author, what the progress, of this so much applauded Exposition of Christ's descent into hell; we next proceed to the examining and confutation of the same.  
And first the Reader may take notice that all the outworks to this Citadel, esteemed so invincible and inexpugnable, have by us been taken in already in the two former chapters: where we have proved that neither the extreme fear or sorrow which did seize upon him in the Garden of Gethsemane, nor any of his fervent prayers either there or on the Cross itself, no nor the Agony itself, nor the bloody sweat, were any signs or arguments of those hellish pains, which they have fancied to themselves in our Saviour's soul. And we have also proved in the last chapter of all, not only that our Saviour did not die the death of the soul, (as these men blasphemously pretend) but that the work of our Redemption was completed fully, by that bodily and bloody sacrifice which he made of himself upon the Cross. So that there now remains no more but to prove this point (which is indeed the main of all) namely, that Christ neither did nor aught to suffer the pains belonging to the damned, or endured so much as for a moment the torments of hell. And for the proof of this it is fit we know both what those pains and torments are which the damned do suffer, and of what nature are those fires which the Scriptures declare to be in hell; what punishments belong to the soul alone, and what unto the soul and body being joined together. And first of all the torments which the damned suffer in their souls only, though infinite and unexpressible in themselves, may be reduced to these three heads: 1 remorse of conscience, 2 a sense of their rejection from the favour of God, and 3 a despair of ever being eased of that consuming misery which is fallen upon them. Remorse of conscience, that's the first, and one of the most heavy torments suffered by those wretched souls who in their life time wholly renounced the Lord their God to enjoy their pleasures, by which they are kept in a continual remembrance of that madness and folly wherewith they rebelled against the Lord, and of the contumacy wherewithal they refused his mercies: God punishing the souls of such wicked men with the evidence and conscience of their own uncleanness, and with the sight and most infallible assurance of their now everlasting wretchedness. Whether or not this be the Worm our Saviour speaks of 
(a) Mark 9.44. , and of which he telleth us in his Gospel, that it never dyeth, we shall speak more at large hereafter. In the mean time, observe we what the Fathers say touching this particular. Quae poena gravior quam interioris vulnus conscientiae 
(b) Ambros. de Offic. l. 3. c. 4. ? what pain more grievous, saith St. Ambrose, than the wounds of a convicted conscience? Magna poena impiorum est conscientia 
(c) August. in Psal. 53 & 45. ; the conscience of the wicked, saith St. Augustine, is one of their greatest pains or punishments. And more than so, amongst all the afflictions of man's soul (saith he) there is none greater than the conscience of sin. How thinkest thou (saith St. Chrysostom 
(d) Chrysost. Homil. 15. in Act. ) shall our conscience be bitten (alluding to the Worm spoken of before) and is not this worse than any torment whatsoever? With whom agreeth Eusebius also, in his Apology for Origen, published under the name of Pamphilus 
(e) Pamphil. Apolog. pro Origen. , saying, tunc & ipsa conscientia propriis stimulis agitatur, that then the conscience of a wicked man shall be pricked and pierced with the stings of their own proper sins. The second torment which the damned suffer in the soul alone, is the sense of their rejection from the favour of God, pronounced against them in that day by the dreadful Judge, in the word Discedite, depart ye cursed: by which they are not only excluded from the Kingdom of God, but utterly confounded with the grief and shame of that rejection, which they shall suffer at his hands before men and Angels. This is that curse our Saviour speaks of in his holy Gospel, where he affirmed unto the jews 
(f) Luk. 13.28. , that there should be weeping and gnashing of Teeth, when they should see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the Prophets in the Kingdom of God, and themselves thrust out. Of this it is St. Augustine telleth us, 
(g) Aug. Encherid. c. 112.  that to be banished for ever from the Kingdom of God, to want that plentiful abundance of the sweetness of God, which he hath abundantly laid up in store for those that fear him; tam grandis poena est, ut ei nulla quae novimus tormenta possint comparari; is such a grievous pain or punishment that no torments which we know can compare unto it. St. Chrysostom is more express, where he speaks of those, who seem to make it their only desire to scape the miseries of hell 
(h) Chrysost. ad Theodor. laps. Epist. 5. , whereas I (saith he) am of opinion, that to fall or be rejected from the glories of heaven, multo durius est tormentum quam gehena ipsa, is a far more insupportable torment then hell itself. Nor do I think, saith he, that we ought so much to grieve at the evil of hell, as at the loss of heaven and the glories of it, Qui nimirum cruciatus est omnium durissimus, the sense whereof will be more grievous then of all the rest. And so much saith St. Basil briefly 
(i) Basil. de Regul. fusè disputat. 2. , affirming, that the estranging or rejecting from God is a more intolerable evil, than any that is to be feared or expected in hell. And yet these torments might be borne with the greater courage, if there were any hope of release in time, if their damnation were not so confirmed in the Court of Heaven, that they are utterly deprived of all expectation of having any favour from God in the times to come; if there were any end to be expected of those unsufferable torments which are laid upon them. Hope makes an heavy burden light; whereas despair of being eased makes a light burden insupportable. And this despair is that which doth most afflict them, when they are once condemned to the pit of torments. Omni tormento atrocius desperatio condemnatos affliget: No torment (saith the same St. Basil) 
(k) Id. in Psal. 33  afflicts the damned like despair. So much the more, by reason that to hope that Gods irrevocable judgement shall be altered, or his counsel changed, were to hope that God would be false in his word, or wavering in his will so publicly and solemnly pronounced: which were a sin that would deserve an heavier punishment, than they suffer yet. The punishment of the damned shall be everlasting; no hope that ever it will end. And it shall be an everlasting fire, as the scriptures tell us, a fire which shall pray upon the body, and torment the soul; and yet neither devour the one nor consume the other. I know some late Divines do persuade themselves that the fire of hell is allegorical; that there is no such real fire to be found therein, as the world hath hitherto been made believe. But when I hear our Saviour Christ pronounce this sentence, sitting in his most dreadful Court of judgement, when there shall be but little use of tropes and figures, 
(l) Mat. 25.41.  Depart ye cursed into everlasting fire, prepared for the Devil and his Angels: I must crave leave to tie my faith to express words of Scripture, rather than to the acquaint conceits of deceitful men. Of this I shall speak more at large in another place; but whether in the Article of Christ's coming to judgement, or in that of everlasting life, is not yet resolved. In the mean time, I take it for a good rule which we find in Augustine, 
(m) August. de doctrine. Christ. l. 3. c. 10.  that in expounding of the Scriptures, we fly not unto Tropes or Figures unless the proper signification of the words in any place, be either against the truth of faith, or against the honestly of manners, (as in these it is not).  
Which grounds thus laid, I would fain know of Calvin, or any of his followers, whether that all or any of these punishments, which belong properly to the damned, and may be truly and directly called the pains of hell; were suffered by our Saviour in his soul and body, or his soul alone. It could not be remorse of conscience; for where there is no sin, there is no Compunction. Christ might be sorrowful, and afflicted for the sins of man, upon a knowledge of those miseries which attended on them. Remorse there could be none where there was no guilt; and guilt there could be none where there was no sin. And he alone it was who could do no sin, and in whose mouth was found no guile 
(n) 1 Pet. 2.22. , as St. Peter tells us. Rejected he was never from the favour of God, it were indeed an hellish blasphemy to conceive so of him. The sentence of rejection is denounced against those alone, who have provoked God unto anger by their sins and wickednesses; and made him of a friend and Father to become an Adversary. But God was neither angry with, nor adversary to his Son CHRIST JESUS; his well beloved Son, at first, in whom he was well pleased to the very end. And so much Calvin doth confess. Nec tamen innuimus unquam Deum fuisse adversarium illi vel iratum 
(o) Calv. Institut. l. 2. c. 16. sect. 11. . And yet (saith he) we do not intimate hereby, that God was either set against him, or offended with him. Nor doth he say it only, but gives reason for it. For how, saith he, could God be angry with his beloved Son, in whom only he was well pleased? or with what confidence could Christ intercede for us with Almighty God, si infensum haberet ipse sibi, with whom he stood in need of a Mediator to reconcile him to himself? As for despair, if he were neither touched for remorse of conscience, nor fallen from the love and favour of his heavenly Father, there was nothing that he could despair of, but a release in time from the fires of hell; which though they might afflict his body, could not hurt his soul. And Calvin takes it for a grievous calumny which was charged upon him 
(p) Id. sect. 12. , Me desperationem ascribere filio Dei quae fidei contraria sit, that he ascribed to Christ any such despair, which was not consistent with true faith. For wiping off such stain, he declares expressly, that though our Saviour did complain of his being forsaken, ne tantillum quidem deflexit a bonitatis & ejus fiducia, yet he did never start nor waver in that confidence, which he had in the goodness of the Lord: and useth this for an especial argument to confirm the same, (as indeed it is) that whilst he did complain that he was forsaken, Non desinit vocare Deum suum, he ceased not for all that to call God his own. It was still Deus meus, Deus meus, to the very last gasp. And he that hath the confidence as to say my God, to appropriate God unto himself as his own God, is far enough off from being in despair, there's no question of it. Nothing can then be left but the fires of hell, and they could work no further then upon his body, or the outside only of his soul, if I may so call it; the inward man being senseless of the heats thereof, since it was neither subject to rejection or remorse at all: though to say truth, he suffered not the fires of hell, neither in body, nor in soul, nor in both united. Not in his Person in this life, nor his soul singly by itself whilst he lived amongst us. For hell fire is not to be found but in hell itself, and neither soul nor body were in hell, when he was alive. Not in his body after his death and burial, for that lay quiet in the Grave, neither touched nor troubled. Nor in his soul neither when he went to hell; for none do suffer hell torments in the place of torments; but they which are sentenced to DAMNATION: and I have so much confidence of their Christianity, as to believe they dare not say, (and as yet they do not) that Christ was damned. No Christian could endure such an horrid blasphemy; especially if it were delivered in terms express. Yet I must tell you by the way, that some come very near it, to a tantamont; whose doctrine it is, (and 'tis a doctrine built upon calvin's principles) that Christ did locally descend to the place of torments, & ibi quoque poenas nostris peccatis debitas luisse, and did there suffer the very pains which are due to us for our sins. For otherwise say they, (which is calvin's reason) non plena fuisset ipsius pro nobis satisfactio, his satisfaction for our sins had not been sufficient. Which were it true (as Beza very well observeth) Ne corpori quidem parcendum erat, he was not to have spared his body, but was to have descended into hell both in body and soul, in regard that death eternal is the wages of sin, and that not of the soul only, but the body also. Such horrible absurdities do men fall into, if once they stray aside from the paths of truth. If then he neither suffered remorse in conscience, nor rejection from the fight and favour of God, nor had any reason to despair of God's love to him, which are properly the punishments or torments which do belong unto the damned; if he suffered not so much as for a moment the very fire of hell in the place of torments: assuredly he tasted no more of hell pains in his soul, than his body in the grave did of grief and sorrow. But then they say, that he did struggle hard with the powers of darkness, and trembled at the horror of God's dreadful judgements 
(q) Calvin Institut. l. 2. c. 16. . This we acknowledge to be true, but this is short I trow of the pains of hell. He struggled hard, no doubt, with the Prince of darkness, both in his Temptation in the Wilderness, and all those conflicts which he had with the powers of hell both in the Garden and on the Cross. He trembled also, it is probable; upon the apprehension of God's anger against sinful man, whose person he had taken on him; and on the fight and knowledge of those dreadful punishments even eternal death, which God in his just judgement did denounce against wilful and impenitent sinners. If Calvin mean no more than this, by his Oportuit eum cum inferorum copiis, aeternaeque mortis horrore, quasi consertis manibus luctari 
(r) Id. ibid. s. 11. ; we assent unto him. But who knows not, that hath but common sense and reason, how much the greatest conflict with the powers of Satan, the greatest apprehension that a man can have of God's wrath and anger against sin, the greatest trembling that can possibly invade him on that apprehension; falls short of all the least of those infinite torments which are prepared in hell for the damned souls.  
But then the question will be asked, whether Christ did not suffer all those punishments for the redemption of man; which man himself must needs have suffered, had not Christ come to redeem him: if yea, he must then suffer also the pains of hell, which can be understood in no other sense then in that they take it; if not, there wanted somewhat to make up the scale for satisfaction of God's justice. To this I answer first in the way of negation, in plain terms he did not, for he neither was nor could be damned, and what else but damnation is the final punishment belonging to impenitent sinners? I answer secondly, with a limitation, that he did suffer all those things which either were beseeming him, or behooful for us; all kind of punishments whatsoever, which did neither● prejudice that plenitude of sanctity or science which was vested in him. For further clearing of which point, we must distinguish with the Schoolmen 
(s) Dr. Field of the Church, l. 5.17.  of three sorts of punishments: whereof the first is called culpa, which is plainly sin, as when God punisheth one sin with another, as the proud with envy, the covetous man sometimes with miserable parsimony, sometimes with ambition; the second is ex culpa & ad culpam, something proceeding from sin, and inducing to it, as natural concupiscence, an inclination to do evil, a contrariety in the faculties of the soul, etc. The third is ex culpa, sed nec culpa nec ad culpam, as they phrase it, that is to say, that which proceeds from sin, but neither is sin in itself, nor doth incline him unto sin in whom it is. As hunger, thirst, weakness and death itself, which are the consequents of sin since the sin of Adam. Of this sort only are the punishments which our Saviour suffered, and they are likewise of two sorts: for they are either suffered for sin imputed, or for sin inherent; a man being sometimes punished for his own offences, and sometimes for another's fault imputed to him. He that is punished for his own faults hath remorse of conscience, condemning himself of drawing such guilt upon his soul, and with that guilt such miseries both on soul and body: but he that suffereth for the fault of another man, of which he is no cause at all, either by persuasion, help, consent, or example; hath no such remorse. Now our Redeemer suffered for the sins of other men, and not for any of his own; and consequently was not touched with remorse of conscience, though it be generally found in all men at one time or another, and be neither sin, nor inducement to sin. Lastly, these punishments which are punishments only, and not sin, such as are common to the whole nature of man, and suffered for the faults of another man, are of two sorts also: either the punishments of sin eternally remaining in stain or guilt; or ceasing, at the least broken off by unfeigned repentance. Those of the first sort according to the rules of Divine justice, must be eternal in regard of duration, and by consequence accompanied with desperation, which is always found where there is an impossibility of ever coming to enjoy a better estate: whereas it is not any way necessary, nor doth the justice of God require it, that the punishments of sin which is repent of, ceasing and forsaken, should be either everlasting, or joined with despair. For as in every act of sin, on the aversion from God who is objectively infinite and incommutably good, there followeth poena damni, or the loss of God, which is an infinite loss; and as to the inordinate conversion of the sinner to things transitory, which must needs be finite, there answereth poena sensus, which though violent and bitter for a time, is yet finite also: so to the eternity of sin remaining everlastingly in s●ain or guilt, answereth the eternity of punishment which followeth on it; so to sins intermitted, ceasing and repent of, a suffering also for a time proportioned to it. So that though every sinner sinneth in suo aeterno, as St. Gregory speaketh 
(u) Gregor. in job. l. 34. c. 10. , in that he would sin ever might he live for ever: and thereby casts himself into an impossibility of giving off in himself, and consequently into an eternity of punishment which is due to him for the same: yet if he make such use of the grace of God as to cease from sin, and turn from his iniquities to the living Lord, God's justice may require extremity of punishment proportionable to the sin committed, but the eternity of punishment it requireth not. And therefore seeing our Saviour suffered for such sins (and for such alone) as might be broken off by grace and the benefit of true repentance, it was no way necessary to the satisfaction of the Divine justice of God, that he should endure eternal punishment. Which being summed together make a perfect answer to the question formerly proposed, that is to say, Whether Christ ought to suffer all those punishments for the redemption of man, which man himself must needs have suffered had not Christ come to redeem him. The sum of which is briefly this, that Christ suffered the whole general punishment of sin, that only excepted which is sin, or consequent on the inherence and eternity of it, as remorse of conscience and despair: and that although he did not suffer the pains of Hell, or any punishment of the damned, either in specie, or in loco: yet did he undergo some punishments conformable and answerable to them in extremity, as the apprehension of the wrath and anger of the Lord avenging himself upon the sinner, but neither infinite nor eternal, as the rejection of a sinner from the sight of God.  
Against this truth thus stated and determined by us, there remain only two objections: the one relating generally to the doctrine of Christ's descent into hell, the other to it as it stands established in the Church of England. And first as to the Doctrine generally it is thus objected, that if there were no more in the sufferings of Christ, than the submitting of himself to a bodily death, and to the anger of the Lord for so short a season; it could not possibly occasion such a consternation, such a fear and horror, as he expressed both in the Garden and upon the Cross: or if he did, how infinitely short must he fall of that magnanimity, which is found in ordinary Thiefs and Robbers 
(x) Calv. Instit. lib. 2. c. 16. sect. 12. , which is calvin's argument; or of the gallantry of the Primitive Martyrs 
(y) ap. B. Bilson survey, p. 388.389. , as other more modestly infer, who most courageously both did and do go forth continually to meet their deaths, and satisfy the fury even of partial Judges? For answer unto which though it may be said that those particulars of whom they speak endure a stronger conflict with the powers of death, than we are conscious of which look on at random, and are not sensible at all of the pains they feel, or the extremities in the last act of their Tragedy: yet we shall give a more particular and punctual answer. And first we say for Malefactors, that God doth many times give them over to a reprobate sense, so that they carelessly seem to contemn God's judgements in this present world, and so prepare themselves more fully for the judgements of the world to come. As for the Martyrs they know well that the wrath of God towards them is appeased by Christ; that they shall feel no more but the hands of men; and that as the cruelty of men increaseth towards them, so God doth give them strength and comfort to undergo what ever shall be laid upon them: whereas CHRIST was to satisfy God's wrath for the sins of mankind, to undergo the punishment which was due unto them (according to the Rules and limitations before laid down) and not alone to fall into the hands of men, but to endure a bitter conflict with the powers of hell, which did on every side assault him; which never any Martyr was marked out to do. Next in relation to this doctrine as now it stands established in the Church of England, it is objected, that howsoever the Articles of Religion in King Edward's days, might seem to intimate a local descent into hell, according to the sense of the Ancient Fathers: yet no such thing could be inferred from the present Article, established in the form and manner declared before. Their reason is, because that allegation of St. Peter's words touching Christ's preaching to the spirits in prison, which was contained in the Book of King Edward's time, to show what manner of descent it was they meant, is totally left out in the present Article established in the reign of Queen Elizabeth 
(z) Ap. eund. ibid. . This they conceive to be an evident declaration that the Church doth not now understand that Article, as at first it did: and therefore since it doth not mean such a local descent, as hath been hitherto maintained in this discourse, it may be construed in that sense which they put upon it. To which we need but answer this, that the words alleged from St. Peter in the former Article, were omitted by the Synod in the late Queen's times, not because they did not so understand the Article, as both their Predecessors and the Fathers did: but either because Christ's preaching to the spirits in prison, seemed to be set down for the sole reason of his descent into hell: or that they thought not fit to impose that for the meaning of St. Peter's words, to be believed of necessity by all good people in the Church of England. As for the putting their own sense upon it (as indeed they do) I will but add this declaration or Injunction of his Sacred Majesty; that is to say, that no man shall hereafter either print or preach to draw the Articles aside any way, but shall submit unto it in the plain and full meaning thereof: and shall not put his own sense or comment to be the meaning of the Article, but shall take it in the literal and Grammatical sense. With which expression I conclude this long dissertation.    

ARTICULI 6. Pars 2da. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. i e. Tertia die resurrexit a mortuis. i e. The third day he rose again from the dead.  

CHAP. X. Of the Resurrection of our Lord and Saviour, with a consideration of the circumstances and other points incident to that Article.  
IT was the observation of the Ancient Father, that the incredulity of St. Thomas did much conduce unto the confirmation of the Christian faith in this great Article of the Resurrection. Quam felix incredulitas quae omnium seculorum fidei militavit 
(a) August. in joh. ! as St. Augustine hath it: The rest of the Apostles who had seen the Lord, had made this their Colleague acquainted with so great a miracle: too great indeed for one of so weak faith to assent unto. And therefore he requires a more ●ull and perfect demonstration of it, than any of his fellows had before exacted. Unless (saith he) I put my finger into the print of his wounds, and thrust my hands into his side, I will not believe 
(b) Joh. 20.25. . See here the stubbornness of incredulity. The same man who had seen Christ raise up Lazarus, after three days resting in the grave, will not believe he had ability to work the like miracle upon himself. Our gracious Saviour thereupon permits his body to be handled by this unbeliever. And Thomas sensibly convicted of his infidelity, breaks out into this divine ejaculation, MY GOD AND MY LORD 
(c) Ibid. v. 28. . Prae caeteris dubitavit, prae caeteris confessus est, said the Father rightly. Here was a miraculous generation of belief indeed. Faith came not here by hearing, but by believing only: And by this way of generation of belief in him, the Christian Church became the more confirmed and settled in this present Article; this trial and experiment of St. Thomas having clearly manifested, that Christ assumed not a body in appearance only, neither one of a spiritual essence or a new created one; but that he rose again in the same numerical body, in which he suffered on the Cross and paid the price of our Redemption. So that of all that glorious company there was none more fit to testify the truth of this point than he; and to deliver it to the world for his part of this Common Symbol; as it was anciently 
(e) Aug. Serm. 125. the T●mp.  conceived he did. And unto this St. Gregory may possibly relate where he tells us, saying, Dum in Magistro suo palpat vulnera carnis, in nobis sanat vulnera incredulitatis: whilst Thomas feels the wounds in his master's body, he healed the wounds of incredulity in his followers souls.  
And certainly some such experiment as this was exceeding necessary to satisfy the wavering and doubtful soul in so high an Article; which by reason of the seeming impossibility, and unexampled strangeness of the matter hath been more called in question and opposed, both by jew and Gentile, than any other of the Creed. It was indeed a work both of weight and wonder, not to be wrought by any which was simply man. To man, mere natural man, it was no less impossible to give a resurrection to the dead, then to grant a dispensation or indulgence not to die at all. How could it be expected that one merely moral should be of strength sufficient to destroy death, and to bury the grave; to raise himself first from the jaws of death, and receptacles of the grave, and by the power thereof to restore poor man to his lost hopes of immortality? Most justly may it be presumed that had so great a work been possible to mortal man; man being proud enough to attempt great matters, would first have took the benefit of his own abilities, and so more easily have possessed the incredulous world with the truth and real being of a resurrection, by the powerful Rhetoric of example. In cases where the issue may be doubtful, and the trial dangerous, we commonly make trial and experiment (as ignorant Empirics do their potions) upon other men. But where the issue or event is known and certain, likely to yield honour to ourselves in the undertaking; we use not willingly to let others rob us of the glory of it, or be beholding unto others for that which we conceive we can do ourselves. He then which was to be the first-fruits of the resurrection 
(g) 1 Cor. 15.20. , must have something in him more than ordinary, something to raise a doubt in his greatest adversaries (as in josephus a jew but a very modest one 
(h) joseph. Antiq. jnd. l. 18.4. ) whether it were lawful or not to call him man, to reckon him amongst the natural sons of Adam. Tantae ejus res gestae, quantas audere vix hominis, perficere nullius nisi Dei 
(i) Velleius Paterc. hist. l. 2. ; was spoken in the way of flattery by the Court Historian; but may be truly verified of the acts of Christ. Those Miracles of his upon true record, as they could hardly be attempted by a mortal man, so could they be performed by none but a powerful God. For who but he, who both in name and power was the God of nature, had power not only to suspend some acts of nature, but absolutely to overrule the whole course thereof. Of which great works above the ordinary reach of man and nature, if we account the resurrection as the principal, we shall rightly state it. It is within the power of Art and the rules of Physic to repair the ruins of decayed nature, and perhaps prolong the number of a few miserable days. He only could restore life to the dead, who first gave it to the living. He only can restore our bodies to our souls in the last day, who did at first infuse our souls into our bodies. Which miracle before it could be wrought on us, he must first work it on himself; and thereby raise an hope and be- belief in us to expect our own. The head being raised, gives good assurance to the body, that though it do not rise at the same time with it, it shall in due time be raised by it. What other uses may be made of Christ's resurrection we shall see anon. This is enough to show the reasons or necessity thereof by way of preamble; to let us see that all the hopes we have of our own resurrection, depends upon the certainty and truth of this. Which though it be a principle of the Christian faith, by consequence, of common course, to be confessed and not disputed (Oportet enim discentem credere, as the old rule is): yet sithence that the truth thereof hath been much suspected by the jews, and the possibility debated by the Gentiles: it will be necessary for the settling of a right belief to satisfy the one, and refel the other. Which done it will be easily seen, that there is reason and authority enough to confirm this truth, were it not left us for a principle.  
And first beginning with the jews who first and most maliciously opposed this part of holy Gospel, we purpose to proceed with them by the authority of Scripture and of reason both. To the old Testament and our proofs from thence, we shall challenge an obedience from them, because by them confessed for Scripture, and reverenced as the Oracles of Almighty God. And for the new, the writings of the holy Evangelists, we shall expect submission to the truths thereof, so far forth as it shall appear to be built on reason and unavoidable Demonstration. Now the old Testament consisteth in that part thereof which doth reflect upon the birth and actions of our blessed Saviour, either of types and figures, or else of Prophecies and examples, and the first type which looks this way is that of Isaac 
(k) Gen. 22. per tot. , the only son, the only beloved son of a tender father: a type both of his death and his resurrection. In which observe how well the type and truth do agree together. The Altar was prepared, the fire kindled, Isaac fast bound and ready to receive the blow; the knife was in his Father's hand, and his arm stretched out to act the bloody part of a Sacrificer. And yet even in the very act and so near the danger, God by his holy Angel, and a voice from heaven delivered the poor innocent from the jaws of death, and restored him back unto his father when all hopes had failed him. How evidently doth this fact of Abraham's stretching out his hand to strike the blow, and being withholden by the Angel from the blow itself, fore-shadow those sacred fundamental truths which we are bound to believe concerning the true bodily death, and glorious resurrection of our Lord and Saviour? The jews themselves in memory of this deliverance, did celebrate the first of Tisri (which is our September) usually called the Feast of Trumpets, with the sound of Rams horns or Corners 
(k) P. Phagius in Levit. 23. , and counted it for one of the occasions of that great solemnity: which shows that there was somewhat in it more than ordinary, somewhat which did concern their nation in a special manner. Needs therefore must the jews of our Saviour's time be blind with malice, at the least with prejudice, that look upon this story of Isaac the child of promise, only as the relation of a matter past, not as a type and shadow of the things to come: this only son of Abraham, this child of promise, the only hope or pledge of that promised seed which was expected from the beginning, being to come thus near to death, and yet to be delivered from the power thereof, that so the faith of Abraham, touching the death and resurrection of his son the heir of promise, might be tried and verified, or rather that by experiment our Saviour's death and resurrection might be truly represented and foreshadowed in Isaac's danger and delivery. And this is that to which St. Paul alludeth saying 
(l) Heb. 11.17, 18, etc. , By faith Abraham when he was tried offered up Isaac, and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son, of whom it was said, that in Isaac shall thy seed be called; accounting that God was able to raise him up even from the dead, from whence also he received him in a figure, i. e. a figure of the resurrection of Christ, the promised seed, represented by it, though Abraham probably looked no further than the present mercy.  
Isaac then was the true representation and foreshadowing of our Saviour's death and resurrection. And so the wonderful increase of Isaac's seed (in whom all the nations of the world were to be blessed) was as full an emblem of our Saviour's seed and generation, which cannot be numbered: he having begotten unto God since his resurrection more sons and daughters throughout all nations, than all the children of Abraham or Isaac according to the flesh, though like unto the sands of the Sea for multitude. But the circumstances of our Saviour's selling and betraying his cruel persecution both by Priests and people, the whole story of his humiliation unto death and exaltation after his resurrection, are more perfectly foreshadowed by the cruel persecutions of joseph procured by his brethren, by his calamity and advancement in Egypt. The story is so well known it needs no repeating 
(l) Gen. 37. & 41. . And the afflictions laid on both by the sons of jacob, in a manner parallel themselves. Both of them were the firstborn of their several Mothers, both of them the best beloved sons of their Fathers; and for this cause both of them envied and maligned by their wicked and ill natured brethren, by whom they were both severally betrayed and sold for a contemptible piece of money. So far the parallel holds exactly; go we further yet. The pit whereinto Joseph's brethren cast him, as also the pit or dungeon unto which he was doomed by a corrupt and partial judge 
(m) Gen. 39.20. , on the complaint of an imperious whorish woman without proof or witness; what was it but the picture of our Saviour's grave, to which he was condemned in the sentence of death, by as corrupt a Judge as Potiphar, on the bare accusation and complaint of an Adulterous generation (as the Scripture calls them) without proof or evidence? And the deliverance of joseph from both pit and dungeon, his exaltation by Pharaoh over all the land of Egypt, and his beneficence to his Brethren, whom he not only pardoned, but preservation from famine; what were they but the shadows and resemblances of Christ's resurrection, his sitting at the right hand of God the Father, by whom all power was given him both in heaven and earth: and finally his mercy to the sons of men, whose sins he doth not only pardon, but preserve them also from the famine of the word of God? The Kings ring put on Joseph's hand 
(n) Gen. 41.42. , the gold chain put about his neck, and the vesture of fine linen or silk wherewith he was arrayed by the King's command: what were they (as the Ancients have observed before) but the resemblances of those glorious endowments with which the body or Humanity of Christ our Saviour hath been invested or apparelled since his resurrection? More than this yet, The name of Zaphnath Paaneah 
(o) Ibid v. 45.  given to joseph by the King's appointment, and the Proclamation made by Pharaoh that every knee should bow before him: what is it but a model or a type of that honour, which God the King of Kings hath ordered to be given to Christ: to whom he hath given a name above every name 
(p) Phil. 2.9, 10 , that at the name of JESUS every knee should bow of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth? Where by the way, (and that addeth something farther to the parallel also) the name of Zaphnath Paaneah as the Hebrew reads it, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Psonthem Phanech as the Septuagint, is naturally (as the learned Mr. Gregory 
(q) Observations on the Scrpt. c. 16.  very well observeth) a Coptick or Egyptian word: and signifieth an Interpreter of hidden things, or a revealer of secrets. And so not only the Babylonish Targum and others of the Rabbins do expound the word, but we find the same exposition in Theodoret also, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; What (saith he) meaneth Pspothomphanech? To which he answereth, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. An interpreter of hidden things. Which also very well agreeth to our Lord and Saviour, to whom all hearts be open, all desires known, and from whom no secrets can be hidden: Come (said the woman of Samaria) and behold a man that hath told me all the things that ever I did, joh. 4.29. The jew which through this thin vail on the face of joseph, doth not behold the portraiture and lineaments of Christ our Saviour, is not so properly to be termed blind because he cannot see, as because he will not. Such also was the type of the Prophet Daniel, cast by the malice of his enemies (the King unwillingly consenting) into the den of ravenous cruel Lions, the door sealed up with the King's Ring, nothing but death to be expected. And yet behold a resurrection in the person of Daniel, exactly typifying that of Christ our Saviour, in each of the particulars before remembered.  
But of all types, especially as to the circumstances of time and place, that of the Prophet jonas doth come nearest home; and it comes close home too, as to the occasion. jonas 
(s) Jonah 1▪  went down into the Sea, and put himself into a Ship to fly from the presence of the Lord; but a great tempest overtook him, a tempest of extraordinary violence, that neither art nor strength could prevail against it; insomuch that the Mariners although Heathens did conclude aright, that it was of God's immediate sending, and that there was some heinous sinner got aboard amongst them, which drew down vengeance from above upon all the rest. To Lots they went jonas was found to be the party; who willingly and cheerfully submitting to the will of God, to save the rest, in danger to be cast away, said frankly without opposition or repining at it, Tollite me, take me and cast me into the sea; Better one perish then so many. Accordingly cast in he was, and drowned as the poor men thought, that had cast him in. But the Lord prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah 
(t) Jona. 1.17. , and Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights: which time expired, the Lord spoke unto the fish, and it vomited out Jonah on the dry land 
(u) Ch. 2.10. . This is Historia vera, a true relation of the story in respect of jonah, but it is Sacramentum magnum a very great mystery withal in regard of Christ. For Ecce plusquam Ionas hic 
(x) Mat. 12 41. , behold a greater than jonas is presented here. It was but signum Prophetae 
(y) V. 39 , the sign of the Prophet jonah, as our Saviour calls it, in respect of the history; but it was Res signata too, in regard of the mystery. And so it is affirmed by Christ whose death and resurrection it foreshadoweth to us 
(z) V. 40. : viz. As jonas was three days and three nights in the Whale's belly, so shall the son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth 
(a) Mat. 12.40. . Never did type and truth correspond more perfectly. For who knows not how usual a thing it is to compare the world unto a ship or argosy wherein all mankind is embarked, all the sons of Adam; and amongst them the son of man, as he calls himself. But all the sons of Adam being sinners from the very birth, no wonder if the tempest of God's anger fell upon them all, and made them all in danger to be cast away. In which amazement and affright, only the son of man (like jonah 
(b) Jonah 1.  in the sides of the ship) slept it out securely 
(c) Mat. 8.24. : who though he knew no sin, was made sin for us, by taking our iniquities upon his account, and in that sense the greatest sinner in the vessel. So that the high Priest did not prophesy amiss when he said this of him, It is expedient that one man do die for the people 
(d) Joh. 11.50. , that the whole nation might not perish. Never was doubtful Oracle fulfilled more clearly. For Christ no sooner found what their purpose was, but he was at his tollite too, as willing to be thrown in as jonas was: and therefore said to those who came out against him, Sinite hos abire, let those go their way 
(e) Joh. 18.8. . I only am the man that must stay this storm, and pacify the wrath of Almighty God. And so accordingly it was done, God's wrath thereby appeased, poor mankind saved: and Christ, like jonas, having lain three days and three nights in the heart of the earth, did on the third day rise again; and by so doing vanquished death, and swallowed up the grave in victory. But this particular we shall hereafter meet with, and more fully speak of when we are come unto the Circumstances of the resurrection; of which this of the time the third day, is the most material. I add this only for the present in respect of the jews, who being by Christ foretold of his resurrection, and in so evident a type thereof as this Signum Prophetae, this sign of the Prophet jonas, as himself entitles it, could look with an Historical faith on the resurrection of the Prophet out of the belly of the Whale, and yet give no belief unto that of Christ out of the bowels of the earth; though testified and confirmed unto them by such pregnant evidence. And yet I shall crave leave to add, that if jonah was the Widow of Sereptas son, he whom Elias raised from death to life, 1 King. 17. as many of the jewish Doctors do affirm he was: the parallel will yet come closer than before it did. For jonas in the Whale's belly was but dead putative, in the esteem and eye of men; but in the Widow's Chamber he was dead realiter, and so more perfectly resembling him whose sign he was.  
This leads me on to the next way of evidence in regard of the jew, which is that of example. Themselves had read in holy Scripture, and believed accordingly, that Elias 
(g) 1 Kings 17.  had restored from death to life the son of the Sareptan woman, whosoever he was: and that Elisha did not only work the like wonder on the dead child of the Shunamite 
(h) 2 King. 4.34 etc. , but that his dead body did revive a man, and raised him also from the grave 
(i) 2 King. 13.21. . And to this head we may reduce the more than wonderful deliverance of Daniel from the Lion's den, and the three Hebrew Salamanders from the fiery furnace; all of them putative dead, all of them ransomed by the Lord from the merciless fury of the grave and jaws of death; and that miraculous deliverance no less to be esteemed then a Resurrection. To each of these the jews most readily give assent. How then can they deny it unto this of Christ? Assuredly it was as possible to God to raise our Saviour from the dead (if we consider him no further than a mortal man) as to raise dead bodies by the prayers of the Prophets, and by the dead carcase of Elisha; or as it had been to reprieve Daniel and the three children from the hands of death. Why then do they deny it unto this of Christ? Not because they did not think it possible, but because they would not have it believed. It stood not with their interest and private ends to have it pass for currant with the common people. Our Saviour Christ had been too diligent, as they thought, in the discharge of his great office, in the discovery and anatomising of their corruptions and impieties: and they were loath to have his doctrine justified by so great a miracle. Rather than so, to save their superstitions they will lose themselves, Non tam de suis Religionibus bene meriti, quam de se male 
(k) Lact. l. 1. c. 1. . Now as the jews believed the Scripture relating the occurrences of the ages past; so gave they as full credit to them foretelling things which were to come; which is our last sort of proofs delivered from the old Testament, in the way of Prophecy. And first we meet with that of David in the book of Psalms, viz. Thou shall not leave my soul in hell 
(l) Psal. 16.10. , neither shalt thou suffer thy holy One to see corruption. A privilege which did not appertain at all to David, who was dead and buried, and had seen corruption; his Sepulchre which continued till our Saviour's time being nothing but a glorious emptiness: therefore by him (or rather by the holy Spirit speaking in him) intended to our Lord and Saviour, the fruit and glory of his loins. A matter in itself so clear and evident, that when St. Peter pressed it home as a proof and evidence relating to the resurrection of the son of David 
(m) Act. 2.27. ; those very jews who had so wilfully cried down this truth, had nothing to oppose against it. Thus also did Isaiah prophesy concerning him 
(n) Isa. 53.10. , that the Lord would break him and make him subject to infirmities, making his soul to be an offering for sin; but yet withal, that notwithstanding this he would prolong his days, and the work of the Lord should prosper in his hands; as the jews could not but perceive that indeed it did. But most exactly that of Hosea, in whom we do not only find the substance of this resurrection prophesied, but the very Circumstances. Come (saith the Prophet) Let us return unto the Lord 
(o) Host 6.1, 2.  for he hath spoilt us and he will heal us, he hath wounded us and he will bind us up. After two days will he revive us, and the third day will he raise us up, and we shall live in his sight. A text so plain and evident to the present purpose, (though possibly intended by the Prophet of some speedy deliverance which by his mouth the Lord was pleased to promise to the house of judah) that as it clearly doth foretell of a Resurrection, so the accomplishment thereof in the man Christ jesus might serve abundantly to convince the most stubborn jew, that it was principally meant and foretold of him. Impleta in plerisque Prophetarum vaticinia, etc. 
(p) Lact. l. 1.4.  The undeniable fulfilling of so many Scriptures might very well persuade men not possessed with prejudice, first that our Saviour CRRIST did rise again according to the holy Scriptures; and secondly, that because he rose again according to the holy Scriptures, that therefore he was CHRIST the Saviour.  
We come next in order to this miracle, not as foreshadowed in types, or foretold in Prophecies, or otherwise exemplifyed in the book of God; but as accomplished in its time, and left upon record in the Evangelists. And here we will not beg the jews to assent unto our Gospel, but our proofs. Themselves had seen our Saviour raise his dead friend Lazarus from the stench of the grave 
(q) Joh. 11.39. , after he had been dead four days, and began to putrify. They also knew, as well as any of his own Disciples, that he had formerly restored from death to life, the widow's son of Naim 
(r) Luk. 7.12 etc. , and the daughter of jairus 
(s) Luk. 8.55. . How then can they deny him power to work the like miracle on himself? At lest why might not God be able to restore him unto the benefit of life again, by whose ministry, if not also power, the benefit of life was restored to others? True it is, that had this mighty work of wonder been done in a corner, or in some dark and solitary descent, there might have been suspicion of imposture conceived against it. But God well knew with what a wilful generation he had to do; what opposition he was like to find in the promulgation of this Gospel. For this cause, as he made choice of a great and mighty City for the stage or Theatre, whereon to act this work of wonder; so did he also take a time in which that mighty City was most full and populous, even the feast of the Passeover. A time in which not only those which were jews by birth resorted thither, for the solemnising of that festival; but even such Proselytes of every nation under heaven, as were daily added to the Covenant. Once I am sure that Cestius a Roman Precedent numbering the people which came thither to observe this Feast 
(t) joseph. de Bello judaic. l. 2. , found them to be two millions and 700000 souls, all clean and purified, fit for the legal eating of the Paschal Lamb. God certainly had thus disposed it in his heavenly wisdom, that so the tidings of the resurrection might with a swifter wing fly over all the parts of the world (then known) and with more ease prepare the people for salvation. Which circumstance considered rightly as it ought to be, were of itself sufficient to convince the jews of a most obstinate incredulity; who seeing could not choose but see, yet would not perceive. Ampla civitas, ampla persona, rem quaerentes latere non sinit 
(u) De Civ. dei. l. 22. c. 10. , as St. Austin hath it.  
But the malice of that people will not so be satisfied. For when the Lord was risen as he had foretold them, the Soldiers must first be corrupted to accuse the Disciples of Felony; and when that failed, themselves are ever forwards to condemn them of folly. The Lord had often signified unto them that the third day he would be raised from the dead; that the Temple of his body should be destroyed, and in three days built up again: and they were resolute, if strength and cunning could prevail to defeat him of the glory of his resurrection. Upon this ground they had a warrant from the Governor to make sure the Sepulchre, to place a watch about it, and to seal the stone. But when the dawning of the third day, and the relation of the Soldiers had proclaimed the miracle, they then gave money to the Soldiers to say, and if need were to swear, that his Disciples came by night, and stole him away whilst they slept 
(x) Mat. 28.13. . Dormientes testes adhibent, as said St. Augustine of them in the way of scorn. This is the most they have to trust to, and this report as it seems clearly by the text did hold long amongst them: but this, if well considered, is both false and foolish. Never was accusation worse contrived than this. For first it is not to be thought that his Disciples would adventure to come by night; a few weak men, and those too much dejected in their Master's passion, to stir abroad in so unseasonable a time and so full of danger▪ Or grant that his Disciples might come by night, in expectation of the issue, to see what would become of their Master's promises; yet certainly it could not be with an intent to steal his body. The Monument (they knew) was too well guarded, to be forced by them: for what could they poor men, unexpert and unarmed, and but few in numbers, against a guard, a guard of choice and able fellows, culled out and well appointed for the present service. Nor was it likely that the body was took thence by stealth either by them or any others whatsoever. The body had been wrapped in sear clothes, quae non minus quam pix corporis linteamina conglutinate 
(z) Chrysost. in Mat. c. 28. , is the Father's note, which did stick as close unto his skin as it had been pitch. And they that came to steal his body, would questionless have stolen him with his shroud and all, and not have took the pains to strip him in a place so dangerous. Or grant that too, it is not to be thought that they had either so much leisure, or so strong a confidence, or so little care of their own safety, as to spend their time in curiosities, or take the pains to wrap up the kerchief which was upon his head, and lay it in a place by itself 
(a) Joh. 20.7. , as St. john records it. It is a timorous kind of trade to be a thief, much more to violate the Sepulchers of those that sleep, and rob the grave of its inhabitants, and seldom have such vain capricios as to spend their time in needless and superfluous compliments. Non enim fur adeo stultus fuisset, ut in re superflua tantum laboraret 
(b) Chrysost. in locum. , said the Father rightly. Let us proceed a little further, and grant this also, that his Disciples came by night, and that they came to steal his body; yet certainly it was not while the soldiers slept. For if they were asleep▪ as they say they were, how could they justify their tale, that his body was taken thence by stealth, or that the Felony had been committed by his Disciples? yes certainly it must needs be as they relate it, for they were fast asleep all night, and neither heard the tongues, or saw the looks of them that stole him. Admit this also for this once that his Disciples stole his body, and that they stole him while the soldiers were fast asleep: yet could not they restore the dead body unto life again. And it was a thing too well known to be denied, that our Saviour was not only seen by his Apostles, with whom he did converse, and eat, and drink, and performed other acts of a living man, but showed himself to more than five hundred 
(c) 1 Cor. 15.6.  at one time together, which was perhaps the time and hour of his Ascension. A thing which passed so current for a truth undoubted, that josephus, one of the most learned and discerning men, which have been of that Nation since the times he lived in, relating only on the by some passages touching Christ our Saviour, and of his being put to death by Pontius Pilate, adds also this, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
(d) joseph. de Antiq. judaica. l. 18.4. , viz. that he showed himself alive again on the third day, and conversed with men.  
It seems the Priests and Pharisees, and other leading men of the jewish Nation, were conscious to themselves of this conspiracy, and of the weakness of the practice. Their next art therefore is to condemn the followers of our Lord of too much credulity, and when they could not condemn them of felony, to accuse them of folly. They grant indeed that on the third day his body was missing in the Sepulchre: yet that himself had raised himself from the grave again, had never entered into the hearts of men of wisdom; if any did believe it, as some such there were, they either were poor silly women, or men of the inferior sort, a company of poor contemptible persons, Fishers and Publicans, and the like. Men who had left their trades to attend on him, as heretofore some did on Theudas 
(e) Act. 5.37. , who boasted of himself to be some great body, in hope to raise their fortunes by him: and finding how they were deceived in their expectation, were willing to lay hold on any thing which might keep them up in reputation amongst ignorant and credulous men. Nec difficile sane fuit persuadere Pastoribus 
(f) Lact. l. 1. c. 22. , and commonly such men are most easily befooled into belief of any strange thing which is told unto them. This is the last refuge which the jews found out, but this will never save them harmless in the day of judgement. For the belief of our Redeemers Resurrection stopped not here, but by degrees was entertained by the most eminent men both for wit and learning over all the world: thousands of which have been so confident herein that they bare witness of this truth to the last drop of their blood; and rather chose to give their own bodies over unto death, then to make doubt of, and therefore much more to deny the Resurrection of his. A truth which became credible at first by the confident asseverance of them that saw it, then by the constancy of those that died for the Confession of it, and finally by the vast multitudes of those who have since believed it. The Father so resolved it, saying. Quod credibile primum fecit illis videntium certitudo, post morientium fortitudo, jam credibile mihi facit credentium multitudo. And which adds most unto the wonder, the men by whom this Gospel was thus propagated over all the world, were (as the jews objected) both unlearned and simple, devoid of Rhetoric to persuade, and Logic to convince by the strength of argument; but furnished by the Lord with great powers from heaven, speaking with tongues, and working miracles, as occasion was to confirm their doctrine. Eloquia in persuadentium mira fuerunt facta, non verba 
(g) Aug. de Civitate dei l. 22. cap. 5. , as St. Austin hath it. Such was the infinite wisdom of Almighty God, that he made use of simple men, to confound the wise, and of ignorant men to confute the learned, lest else the enemy might say, that they prevailed rather by their wit and Artifices then by the truth of that which they preached and published.  
Thus have we brought unto the trial what ever hath been quarrelled by the jews in this present Article. We must next look upon the Gentile, to whom the doctrine of the Resurrection did seem at first a matter of such impossibility, that the Athenians thought it folly, and the Romans frenzy. What would this babbler have 
(h) Act 17.32. , said the wise men of Athens, when Paul enforced this point unto them; Learning had made him mad 
(i) Act. 26.24. , said Festus, when he affirmed the same before his Tribunal. But yet as foolish and phrenetical as it seemed to be, it proved a matter of no great difficulty to answer all objections which were brought against it. Where first it is to be confessed that the jew hath eased us of much care in this particular: the satisfying of their cavils having cleared the history, and left it less suspected to the other adversary, whether Greek or Roman. Nor need we press them further than to gain this of them, that they would not think those points impossible in the Christian Faith, which in their own Authentic stories are accounted possible. The Grecian Writers hath recorded it of Ae●●ulapius, that he restored a man to life by the power of Physic 
(k) Lact. 1.10. , and for that cause hath been enroled ever since amongst their gods. And the best Authors of the Romans do affirm of Romulus, that being murdered by the Senate he was seen in a more stately form then usual to ascend up into the Heavens 
(l) Livy. l. 1. & Florus l. 1. etc. . Which lest it should not pass for current with the common people, Proculus is suborned to testify it on his corporal Oath. Et pejurante Proculo deus ROMULUS, saith Minutius Felix 
(m) In Octavio. . The truth of these reports I dispute not here; Only I make this use thereof, that by the credit and report of their own best Writers it is neither to be thought impossible, that a dead man should be restored again to life, which was the case of Aesculapius amongst the Grecians; or be advanced unto the top of heavenly honour, which was the case of Romulus in the Roman stories. Should they require more proof than they use to give, we then refer them to the secret closerts of Tiberius Caesar, there to peruse a letter writ by Pontius Pilate, in affirmation of this miracle. Which wrought so far into the faith of that mighty Prince, that he proposed it once in the open Senate 
(n) Euseb. hist. Eccles. l. 2. c. 1. Tertul. Apologet. , to have CHRIST enroled and registered amongst the other Deities of the Roman Empire. And certainly it was a point in which the wisest men both of Greeks and Romans did quickly alter their opinion; who as they were of excellent understanding in the works of nature, so were they with less difficulty fitted for the acts of Grace, than were the jews whom prejudice and prepossession had so wholly blinded, that they would not see the Sun of Righteousness when he shined most clearly. And such assuredly is the condition of humane learning, in those who have attained it in a full degree, that it not only doth advance them above other men in the exercise of all moral virtues, but brings them forwards on the way unto life eternal. So from the substance of the Resurrection, or the Quod sit, of it, which we have fully vindicated from the opposition both of jew and Gentile; we next proceed unto the circumstances which attend upon it: one of the which hath given as much occasion of dispute amongst the Christians, as did the main body of the Article to the jews and Gentiles. But this indeed is such a circumstance as comes exceeding near the substance, if it be not of it.  
For whereas it is generally agreed on by all sorts of Christians, that our Saviour rose again the third day according to the Scriptures; yet there appears to be some difference amongst the Evangelists as unto the time of the day in which this wondrous work was wrought, and no small difficulty amongst the learned Christian Writers, how to find out three days precisely, upon good account, in which he was to lie in the grave of death, for the fulfilling of those Scriptures. The third day was the time of his Resurrection, that's agreed on all hands; and that aswell to hold compliance with the sign or figure of the Prophet jonah; as to keep pace with the prediction of the Prophet Hosea. Before that time he did not, and he would not rise, because perhaps some captious people might have doubted, whether he had been really and truly dead, if he had raised himself with more celerity: Nor longer would he put it off, ne Discipulorum fides labasceret, so to consult the wavering and unsettled hopes of his Disciples, not yet improved into a Faith. The business is how to accommodate the time of his being in the grave to the three days and three nights of the Prophet jonah, according to the intimation which himself had made; how to find out those three days which the Scripture speaks of. For being that our Saviour was interred on the sixth day (or Friday) about Sunsetting, and rose again the first day (Sunday) about the rising of the Sun or a little before it: the longest time of his imprisonment in the grave can be but thirty six or thrice twelve hours, which comes exceeding short of three days and nights. To salve this sore there hath been many several plasters made by the learned Writers and Interpreters of holy Scripture: every one thinking best of that which himself prescribeth, and finding some exceptions against those, which have, perhaps, as happily been devised by others. Some do conceive our Saviour's lying in the womb of the earth may be most clearly resolved by that construction, which Lawyers sometimes make in Favorabilibus, for the greater part of three days and nights: so that if he continued in the heart of the earth but an hour or less, above the six and thirty hours before accounted, he then made good the sign of the Prophet jonah, according to the Legal construction of it. And some there be (and those indeed the most in number) which think they have resolved the doubt by that Synecdoche which is allowed in common cases, where the part is reckoned for the whole: as if a man should make an Affidavit (as we use to call it) that he had attended in the Court three days together, it could not be intended nor interpreted that he attended three whole days from morning to evening, but only at such competent hours in every day, as my Lords the judges use to sit. The reason of which Legal allowances and Rhetorical Synecdoches is grounded upon this unquestionable rule of Logic, i. e. Ad veritatem indefinitae Propositionis astruendam sufficit veritas unius vel alterius particularis. And then according unto this Synecdoche or just allowance, our Saviour both in a Logical and a Legal construction may be truly said to be three days and three nights in the bowels of the earth, that is to say, some part of Friday, all Saturday, and some part of Sunday. And this hath generally been entertained for the clearest and most expedite solution of the present difficulty 
(p) Estius in Matth. 12.40. . Who also add this note of Leo, 
(q) De Resurrect. Domini. Serm. 1.  That though our Saviour had fore-signified that he would rest in the grave three whole days and nights, or the far greater part at least: yet to revive the drooping souls of his Disciples, Denunciatam tridui moram mira celeritate breviavit, he cut off a great deal of the time, taking the last part only of the first day, and the first part only of the last, that he might both abbreviate the time and make good his reckoning.  
But against this it is objected, not without good reason, that this solution of the doubt without some further ground first laid, comes not home enough, but leaves it as unsatisfied as before it was. For though this may be good as unto the days in which our Saviour's blessed body was interred in the grave, yet neither by a Logical nor a Legal allowance can it reach at all unto three nights: he being in the grave two whole nights indeed; but not the least part of any third night, as is plain in Scripture. Therefore to bring the business home, they who dislike the former Exposition, do it on this reason, that contrary to the account and computation of the ancient jews, the night is distinguished from the day; whereas indeed according to their Calculation, the night is but a part of the day ensuing, (And the evening and the morning were the first day, Et sic de caeteris) both of them making up together but one natural day. So that when Christ said unto the jews, that the Son of man should be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth; he only meant three natural days, reckoning according as the jews did, unto whom he spoke, who began their natural day at the Sunsetting. Which ground so laid, the former Legal allowance or Synecdoche serves exceeding fitly, our Saviour being in the grave part of the sixth evening and morning, or the sixth night and day conjunct, which was the Friday, or the day whereupon he suffered; the whole seventh evening and morning, or the seventh night and day which was the Sabbath of the jews, or Saturday; and the first evening and morning or the first day and night, which is our Saturday night and Sunday morning. 
(s) Dr. jackson on the Creed, lib. 9 c. 40.  Maldonate a very learned jesuit was the first who went this way to work, in which he hath been followed or rather countenanced, by that great Magazine of learning Bishop Andrews, Dr. jackson the late Dean of Peterburgh, and divers others. To verify his being there three days, (saith that Revend Prelate 
(t) Serm. 12. of the Resurrection. ), it is enough if he were there but a part of every one of them; for it is not three whole days. As in common phrase of speech, we say the Sun shone, or it reigned these three days past, though it did not so all day long, but some part only of each. And if it reigned at all in every one of them, we say true; It is enough there, & it is so here. To verify the three nights; that do we, reckoning as did the jews, and that by warrant out of Gen. 19 the evening and morning but for one; so drawing still the precedent night, and counting it with the succeeding day. So do they still the night passed with the day following, as in Greece they are taught to do; and we doing so it will fall out right. Nor stayeth that learned Father here, but thus compares the Type and the Truth together, and makes the case of Christ thus come home to jonah. 
(u) Id. ibid.  The first day of the three, jonas was in the Ship, and Christ upon the Cross, till Friday, somewhat before the Sunset. All the second day jonas was in the Whale, and Christ in his Sepulchre. The third day, jonas came out of the Whale, and Christ out of his Grave, as it might be about the Sunrising; for this day both Sun's rose together. A fuller and more perfect Parallel betwixt Christ and jonas, he that lists to see, shall find it excellently done in the prosecution of that notable Sermon.  
Some other ways have been found out to salve this doubt, and such as seem more handsomely to decide the Controversy, than any of the three before delivered. But whether they do so indeed, or rather do not leave the matter more perplexed and difficult, I will not take upon me to determine in it; but leave the matter wholly to the Readers judgement. But amongst these I must profess that I can by no means reckon that of Gregory Nyssen (be it spoken with due reverence to that holy man) who to make up the three days and the three nights which our Saviour speaks of, makes that to be the first night in which he kept the Passeover with his Disciples, and in the instituting of his holy Supper, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 offered himself in sacrifice for the sins of man. The second night he makes to be that terrible darkness, which continued from the sixth hour unto the ninth, and divided that day into two, the first beginning at Sunrising, and ending at the sixth hour when that darkness began; the other beginning at that ninth hour (about three of the clock in the afternoon) and holding on until Sunset. The third night which was indeed the very first) he makes to be the night which preceded the Sabbath (or Friday night in our account:) and so conceives that he hath found three days and three nights which our Saviour rested in the grave, fixing his Resurrection in the evening of the Sabbath day, which after their Calculation was the beginning of the first day of the week, by us called Sunday. So he in his Oration de Christi Resurrectione. Which resolution of the doubt, (if I may so call it) the good Father doth not offer as a Demonstration, but leaves it to the Readers judgement, (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) and so do I. The first of those I shall first lay down is Dr. Alabasters, who with a great deal of good Greek and Hebrew, had many whimsies in his Brain, as may appear to any one who hath read the book, which he entitled Ecce Sponsus venit. And his opinion is, that the three days and three nights which our Saviour speaks of, are to be interpreted Secundum universas Coeli plagas 
(b) Ecce sponsus venit. c. , according to the latitude and condition of the several Hemispheres, it being night always in the one when it is day in the other. Et sic e contra. By this compute, the three days and three nights must be reckoned thus. From six of the clock on Friday night (upon our account) till six of the clock on Saturday morning, it was night in all the land of jewrie, and day with their Antipodes in the other Hemisphere, which makes the first night and the first day. From six of the clock on Saturday morning, till six that night, was night with the Antipodes, and day in jewrie; which makes the second day and the second night; and then from six of the clock on Saturday night till six next morning, which was about the time of our Saviour's rising, it was night again amongst the jews, and day again with their Antipodes, which makes the third night, and the third day. This if you take for a Capricio, as indeed the Doctor hath too many throughout that Book; Let us next look on that of Paulus Semproniensis, Bishop of Friuli, according as by him laid down in his Book, de Die Passionis Domini, where he states it thus; 
(c) Paulina Pauli, etc. l 2. cap. 2.  The jews (saith he) being spoiled and plundered of their books, during the Babylonian Captivity, and thereby disabled from finding out the true course of the Moon, otherwise then by such conjectures as the Eye and their observations did afford them; and consequently failing oftentimes in celebrating of the Passeover at the time appointed by the Law; ordained that that festival should be kept two whole days together, that if they chanced to err in the one, they might hit right in the other. And these two days they reckoned but for one alone, as do the Romans at this time in the observation of the Bissextile or Leap-year, (as we use to call it) who according to the Calculation of julius Caesar, reckon the two days of the Bissextile but for one alone, (and so 'tis also in the estimate of the Laws of England to this very day). Insomuch that February for that year, by the decree of the said julius Caesar, is to have no more than 28 days, (as in other years) because the day added unto that month, (or the dies intercalaris, as the learned call it) is to be reckoned for the same day with the day before, both of them being called the sixth of the Calendar of March, in which respect the name of Dies Bissextilis was first given unto it. And on this ground it was resolved by Celsus that famous Lawyer, that if a man was born on the sixth of the Calends of March, (which is our 24. of February) it mattered not whether he were born on the first or second day of the two (that year) because both days were counted in the Law for one. So saith he, in like manner did the jews reckon those two days in which they solemnised the Passeover, but for one day only, both of them passing in their computation for the fifteenth day of the month, in which that feast was to be celebrated by the law of Moses. This he confirms not only by the practice of the modern jews, who for the most part hold themselves to this observation, fathering it on Ezra the Scribe as ordained by him; but also by the testimony of Rabbi Rava, one of the most famous Doctors of that Nation, for the times he lived in, advising them Ne deserant consuetudinem a Patribus observatam, not to forsake the old Tradition left them by their Ancestors of keeping the great festivals two whole days together, according as Ezra had commanded. And this they also did (saith he) if the Passeover fell upon the Sabbath, in which case at the instance and persuasion of Gamaliel, a man both learned in the laws, and skilful in Astrological supputations, they did not only double or reiterate the feast of the Passeover, but that of the weekly Sabbath also. Which gave (saith he) occasion to that phrase of speech used by S. Mark where he calls the first day of the week una Sabbatorum, that is to say the first day after both the Sabbaths. He adds as in the way of super-aboundance, that it was affirmed in the writing of Theophilus Caesariensis (a man exceedingly well skilled in the Paschal Cycles) that our Redeemer suffered on the eleventh of the Calends of April, (which is to us the 22. day of March) and rose again March 25. being the 8. day of the Calends of April; which make up three days and three nights in all): but that his words were altered by Beda, in his Translation of that piece, to make it more conformable to the Tradition of the Church of Rome. This is the sum of his discourse, with which I must confess myself to be much delighted. And were I aswell satisfied in the Allegation of Theophilus Caesariensis, and the alteration made by Beda, as I am in the residue of the proofs by him produced, I might perhaps prefer this way before any other. But being this depends on no other grounds than the bare ipse dixit, or conjecture of my Author only; I know not how to part with the Synecdoche commended to us by St. Augustine 
(d) Aug. Epistol. 49. , Hierome 
(e) Hieron. in locum. , and others of the Ancient Fathers, and still retained and countenanced by so many men of eminence in all kinds of learning. The Reader hath here choice enough, and may use his pleasure.  
As for the difference which seems to be between the Evangelists touching the time of the day in which this wondrous work was wrought; we will first lay down their several words, and then see what is to be said for the reconcilement. St. Matthew saith it was in the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn towards the first day of the week, that Mary Magdalen and the other Marie came to see the sepulchre 
(f) Mat. 28.1. . St. Mark that when the Sabbath was past, they came very early in the morning the first day of the week at the rising of the Sun 
(g) Mar. 16.2. . St. Luke, that having bought their spices on the Eve of the Sabbath, they came very early in the morning upon the first day of the week 
(h) Luk. 24.1. . And finally St. john, that it was early on the first day of the week when it was yet dark 
(i) Joh. 20.1. . In which we have not only an appearing difference between St. john, who telleth us that it was yet dark, and those who that say it was in the morning, as the Sun was rising; but a seeming contradiction also in Matthew, who maketh it to be on the end of the Sabbath, which was Saturday Eve, and yet upon the dawning of the first day of the week, which is Sunday morning. To reconcile St. john to the other Evangelists, St. Ambrose 
(k) Ambros. in Lucae cap. 24.  and Eusebius 
(l) Euseb. ap. Anastas.  were of opinion, that there were two Mary magdalen's of our Saviour's acquaintance, whereof one came unto the Sepulchre in the night, and the other in the morning: But then assuredly the Scriptures would have given us some mark of difference, as in the case of Simon Peter, and Simon the Canaanite; Marry the Mother of JESUS, and Mary the Mother of james and joses; judas who wrote the Epistle extant in his name, and judas Iscariot who betrayed him. Others 
(m) Vide Maldonat. in Mat. 28.1.  conceive that St. Marks text hath received some alteration in setting down the time of his Resurrection, as before we saw it was supposed in the time of his passion: and that in stead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, at the Sunrising, it should be read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Sun not being risen. But such corrections, as we said in the former case, are not only unwarrantable, but unsafe. And if such Criticising on the Text of Scripture might be used with safety, the alteration were more easy if in stead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the second Aorist, St. Mark might be supposed to say in the present tense, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as the Sun was rising; when first his beams began to dispel that darkness, which we find mentioned in St. john. But leaving this correction also as matter dangerous, the safest and most probable way to atone the difference is, that the women did begin to set forwards towards the holy Sepulchre, whilst it was yet dark, as St. john hath it, or very early in the morning, at the breaking or dawning of the day, as St. Matthew tells us; but that they came not to the Sepulchre till the Sun was risen. Or else we may resolve it thus, and perhaps with greater satisfaction to the text and truth, that Mary Magdalen whose love was most impatient of a long delay, went first alone (for St. john speaks of her alone) when it was yet dark; but having signified to Peter what she had discovered, she went to make the other women acquainted with it, and then came all together, as the Sun was rising, to behold the issue of the business. As for the seeming contradiction in St. Matthews words, we shall best see the way to discharge him of it, if passing by the Vulgar Latin, from whence the contradiction took its first Original, we have recourse unto the Greek. In the Vulgar Latin it is Vespere Sabbati in the Evening of the Sabbath, and that according to the jewish computation, must be on Friday about six of the clock, for with them the Evening did begin the day as we saw before. But in the Greek it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which we English in the end of the Sabbath, and then it is the same with St. Marks expression, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, when the Sabbath was passed. And this construction comes more near to the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which points unto a thing which is long since past, as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the hour being now a good while spent, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, you lost your opportunity by your tardy coming. And so the word is here interpreted by Gregory Nyssen 
(o) Greg. Nyss. in Resurr. Orat. 1. , by birth a Grecian, and therefore doubtless one that well understood the Idiotism of his own language: in whom the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in St. Matthew is made to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the very hour and moment of the resurrection. Which ground so laid, let us subjoin these words in St. Matthews Gospel, Chap. 18. to the last words of St. Luke's Gospel, Chap. 23. and then this seeming contradiction will be brought to nothing. St. Luke informs us of the women who had attended on our Saviour at his death and burial, that having bought spices to imbalm his body, they rested on the Sabbath day according to the Scripture, v. 56. And then comes in St. Matthew to make up the story (as all the four Evangelists do make but one full history of our Saviour's actions) which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that when the Sabbath was now past, and that the first day of the week did begin to dawn, they went unto the Sepulchre as they first intended.  
We have not done yet with the time of his resurrection, although the difficulties which concern that time, have been debated and passed over. We find it generally agreed on by all four Evangelists, that the resurrection was accomplished 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, upon the first day of the week; and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, about the dawning of the day, as St. Matthew hath it; or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, about the rising of the Sun, as St. Mark informs. About the dawning of the day; for certainly it was not fit that the Sun of Heaven should shine upon the earth before the heavenly Sun of righteousness. Nay therefore did our Saviour prevent the sun by his early rising, to teach us that the whole world is enlightened only by the beams of his most sacred Gospel; and that he only is the light to lighten the Gentiles, and to be the glory of his people Israel 
(p) Luk. 2.32. . And there was very good reason also why he should choose the first day of the week to be the day of the resurrection more than any other: that as God the Father on that day did begin the creation of the world, in which we live the life of nature; so God the Son should on the same day also begin the creation of a new heaven and a new earth in the souls of men, by which they live the life of grace here, and are thereby prepared for the life of glory in the world to come. The sixth day in which our father Adam did begin to live, was the same day in which the second Adam did begin to die. And the seventh day on which God rested from his labours in the great work of our Creation, was also rested by our Saviour, in the far greater business of our Redemption. Rested I say by him, not sanctified. For Christ did therefore pretermit and sleep out as it were, the jewish Sabbath, that from thenceforth the observation of that day should be laid aside; and that in that neglect of his, there should no further care be taken of the legal Ceremonies. And as God sanctified that day in which he rested from the work of the world's Creation; so the Apostles first, as it was conceived, and afterwards the Church of Christ by their example, did sanctify and set apart that day for religious offices, in which our Saviour canceled the bonds of death, and finished the great work of our Redemption. The Israelites were commanded by the Lord their God, immediately on their escape from the hands of Pharaoh, to change the beginning of the year 
(q) Exod. 12.2. , in a perpetual memory of that deliverance. With very good reason therefore did the Church determine, to celebrate the Christian Sabbath (if I may so call it) upon a day not used before, but changed in due remembrance of so great a miracle, as that of our Saviour's resurrection from the power of the grave, and our deliverance thereby from the Prince of darkness. The Parallel of the world's Creation and the Redemption on all mankind by Christ our Saviour; with the change which followed thereupon in the day of worship, is very happily expressed by Gregory Nyssen in his first Sermon upon Easter or the Resurrection; where speaking of God's rest of the Sabbath day, he thus proceedeth 
(r) Orat. 1. in Christ. Resurr. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. By that first Sabbath (saith the father) thou mayest conjecture at the nature of this, this day of rest, which God hath blessed above all days; For on this the only begotten Son of God (or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as his own words are) who out of a divine purpose of restoring mankind, did give his body rest in the house of death, and afterwards revived again by his resurrection; became the resurrection and the life, the dayspring from on high, the light to them that sit in darkness and the shadow of death. Finally, to insist upon this point no longer, three days our Saviour set apart for the performance of this work and wonder of the resurrection: and answerably thereunto the Church did anciently set apart three days for the commemoration of that work, and wonder which was then performed. In which respect the feast of Easter is entitled by the said Gregory Nyssen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or the three days festival.  
The next considerable circumstance of the resurrection is, that he pleased to work that miracle upon himself in a terrible and fearful earthquake 
(s) Mat. 28.2. , an earthquake so extreme and so truly terrible, that the graves did vomit up their dead 
(t) Id. c. 27.52. , whose ghastly apparitions wandered up and down Jerusalem 
(u) Ibid. v. 53. , and were seen by many of their friends and old acquaintance. Which as it was an extraordinary dispensation, and far above the Common law and course of nature, so was it done by him for a special end: and did not only verify the resurrection of our Lord and Saviour, ut Dominum ostenderent resurgentem 
(x) Hieron. in locum. , as St. Hierome hath it; but also served to assure Gods faithful servants of the resurrection of their bodies, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as we read in chrysostom 
(y) Chrysost. in locum. . So that the Earthquake of itself being great and terrible, and made more terrible by the rising of so many dead men from the bonds of death; no marvel if the Soldiers of the guard were amazed and terrified, and in that fright betook themselves unto their heels, and forsook their charge. At first indeed the affright and astonishment was so great upon them, that they seemed even as dead men, as the text informs us 
(a) Mat. 28.4. . But the first terrors being over, we find them presently in the City with the chief Priests and Elders, declaring the sad news of their ill success, and publishing the glorious wonder of the resurrection. So wonderful was the providence of Almighty God, that those means which were projected for an hindrance of the resurrection, should add unto the fame and glory of so great a miracle; and that those very Soldiers which were hired to guard the Sepulchre, should be the first Evangelists (if I may so call them) by whom that miracle was signified to that stubborn nation. And yet God had a further end than this in the great haste made by the affrighted Soldiers to the Priests and Elders; which was by their departure from the holy Sepulchre, to give the safer opportunity to his Disciples (who were to be the witnesses of his resurrection both to jew and Gentile) to satisfy themselves in the truth thereof. For though the women might presume on the Soldier's gentleness, (who commonly are fair conditioned to that sex) yet for the Apostles to adventure thither till the Soldiers of the guard were removed from thence, had been to run themselves in the mouth of danger, and make themselves obnoxious to the accusation of the Priests and Pharisees. And this was a remote cause of the honour which befell that sex, in being first acquainted with the news of the resurrection; and is another of the circumstances which attends the action. God certainly had so disposed it in his heavenly wisdom, that as a woman was first made the Devil's instrument to persuade man to sin, and consequently unto death: so the same sex also should become the instruments of publishing this glad news that the Lord was risen; and the assurance thereby given of a resurrection to all mankind from the hands of death. Withal observe the power of Almighty God, never so clearly manifested in the sight of men as in the weakness of his iustruments: and that although it was a work sufficient for the ablest Prophet to foretell the resurrection of the Messiah, yet was it so easy when accomplished, that ignorant and silly women, and more than so, that women laden with sins, should be the first that did proclaim it. And there was somewhat in that too, that Christ first showed himself unto Mary Magdalen 
(b) Joh. 20.16. , a woman so infamous for her former life, that she is branded in Scripture by the name of Peccatrix 
(c) Luk. 7.37. , as one who had deserved to be so entitled; and first of all men unto Simon Peter 
(d) 1 Cor. 15.5. , as great a sinner in his kind as Mary Magdalen. For this he did (no doubt) to let mankind know, that there is no sinner so great whosoever he be, to whom (if he repent him of his former sins) the fruit and benefit of Christ's resurrection ought not to be extended and applied: though some restrain the same to some certain Quidams, men more of their election, then Almighty Gods. Whereas the Scriptures plainly tell us, that as in Adam all died, so by Christ all men shall be restored to life 
(e) 1 Cor. 15.19, 20. ; who being risen from the dead is become the first fruits of all them that slept.  
But here perhaps it will be said, How can our Saviour Christ be called the first fruits of them that sleep, considering how many several persons had been raised from the dead before, both in the old Testament and in the new? The answer unto this is easy and the difference great between them and Christ, their being raised from the dead, and his resurrection. For first, our Saviour rose again from the dead, virtute propria, by his ownproper power and virtue, but they were raised again to life, virtute aliena, by the power and ministry of some other. In which regard, we read notin the story of his resurrection, that he was raised from the dead, as if he had been wholly passive in the business, and did contribute no more to it then did the Shunamites child or the daughter of jairus: but resurrexit he was risen, or had raised himself, which showeth him to have been the principal Agent. Nor let it stumble any one that in some places of the holy Scripture the Father is said to raise him, as in Act. 11. 
(f) V. 25.  Both will stand well enough together. For by the same power that the Father is said to have done it, by the same was it done also by the Son. I and my Father are one 
(g) Joh. 10.30. , but one power of both; and therefore whether it were done by both or by either of them, it comes all to one. Secondly, Christ our Saviour did so rise from the dead, as to die no more, to have an everlasting freedom from the power of death; whereas others have been raised from death to life, but to die again. Christ being raised from the dead (saith the great Apostle) dyeth no more; death hath no more dominion over him 
(h) Rom. 6.9. . He is not only free from death, or the act of dying, but from the pains, perils, and the fears of death, and all those sicknesses and sorrows which make way unto it. But so it was not with the son of the widow of Sarepta, or of the widow of Naim, no nor with Lazarus his most dear friend neither, who though they were restored again to this mortal life, yet it was still a mortal life when it was at best; and that mortality was to them as the Prisoner's chain, by which he is pulled back again though he chance to scape. He only did so rise again as by his rising to destroy death, and to clothe himself with immortality. Thirdly, though some were raised before under both Testaments, yet that was but a private benefit to themselves alone, or perhaps unto their Parents or some few of their friends; yet the fruit and benefit thereof did extend no further. But by the resurrection of our Lord and Saviour, there came a signal benefit unto all the world, which else had been fast bound for ever in the bonds of death, without any hope of rising to a better life. For being risen in our nature, than our nature is ri●en; and if our nature be, than our persons may be: especially considering that he and we are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(i) Rom. 6.4. , (as St. Paul hath told us) so graffed into one another, that he is part of us, and we part of him. And therefore very well said Bernard, Resurrexit solus, sed non totus. Though he be only risen, by his own proper power, yet as yet he is not risen wholly, nor will be until we be raised together with him. He is but risen in part by this resurrection; and that he may rise all of him, he must raise 'tis also. In this respect our Saviour is entitled Primogenitus omnis Creaturae 
(l) Col. 1.15. , the first born or first begotten of every creature: viz. first in the order of time, he being the first that was ever raised from death unto life immortal; and first also in the order of causality, all others which have been, or shall be raised or begotten to immortal life, being so raised and begotten by virtue of his resurrection. And in the same respect he is called Primitiae dormientium, or the first fruits of them that sleep; because his rising is not only the pledge and earnest of our rising also, but that we shall be raised to the same state of happiness and eternal glory, which he hath attained since his rising. The offering of the first fruits drew a blessing upon all the rest. For if the first fruits be holy, the lump (saith the Apostle) is also holy 
(m) Rom. 11.16. . If then the first fruits of the dead be offered to Almighty God, in Christ our Saviour; no question but the after-fruits, or the whole increase will be very acceptable, and laid up in the barn of that heavenly husbandman 
(n) Mat. 13.30. , according to the scope of our Saviour's Parable. And yet perhaps St. Paul might have a further aim in calling our Saviour the first-fruits of them that sleep, then hath yet been spoke of: it happening so by the sweet disposition of Gods special providence, that the day of his glorious resurrection did fall that year upon the second day of the feast of unleavened bread, or the morrow after the Sabbath of that great solemnity: upon which day, the first-fruits were to be offered unto God by his own appointment. Of which see Levit. 23.10, 11.  
Here than we have the principal effect and fruit of Christ's resurrection, the resurrection of our own bodies from the power of death, the resurrection both of soul and body to eternal life. And yet there are some other intermediate benefits which redound to us, some other motives and inducements which relate to him. For his part first, had he not risen from the dead, he had still lain under the guilt of that imposture 
(o) Mat. 27.63. , wherewith the Priests and Elders charged him, when he was interred. And who would then have preached his Gospel, or embraced his doctrine, or yielded belief to any thing he had said before? For if Christ be not risen from the dead again, (as St. Paul reasoneth very strongly) then were our faith in vain; and their preaching vain 
(p) 1 Cor. 15.14. . Had he not risen from the dead, and manifested it by such signs and wonders, he never had attained to the reputation of being generally accounted and believed in, for the Son of God: or such a God at best who doth die like men 
(q) Psal. 82.6. , and fall like others of the Princes; some earthly Magistrate at the most, and no great one neither. Nor was it necessary to his glory only, but to our justification. For how could we assure ourselves of salvation by him, or of redemption in his blood; had he been swallowed up in death, and not appeared alive again for our consolation? Manens in morte peccata non expiasset, mortem non vicisset, as the Father hath it 
(r) Hierom. : and then how could we hope to be saved by him, qui se ipsum servare non potuit, who was not of ability to save himself? How could we Christians, of all men most miserable, be possibly assured of this saving truth, that Christ was delivered for our sins, if he had not risen again for our justification 
(s) Rom. 4.25. , that is to say, if by his rising from the dead, he had not settled and confirmed us in that assurance? The reason is, because the resurrection of our Lord and Saviour, was as it were, his actual absolution from those sins of ours for the which he died; and his deliverance from that death, which as the wages of sin we had all deserved. Calvin hath very Orthodoxly resolved it so, Resuscitatio Christi a mortuis ejus est actualis absolutio a peccatis nostris, pro quibus mortuus est 
(t) Calv. Inst. , as he there determineth. And he determineth it according unto that of the great Apostle, saying, if Christ be not risen, your faith is vain, ye are yet in your sins 
(u) 1 Cor. 15.17. , that is to say, still under the command and the guilt of sin, from which you have no other assurance to be absolved and quitted in the day of judgement, then only by the virtue of his resurrection. How wretched then is the condition of the jews and those other Heretics, who either utterly deny the resurrection, as did Simon Magus 
(x) Epiphan. de haeres. , and the Manichees 
(y) Aug. contra Faust. l. 4. c. 16. , or post it off, as not yet past, till some further time, which was one of the heresies of Cerinthus 
(z) Philastr. , or make it but an allegory, no true real action, as do the Family of love 
(a) Display. in Allens Confession. ? Assuredly the least we can affirm of them and the like vile miscreans, is that they have no inheritance in the house of jesse, nor any portion at all in the son of David: that they who wilfully deny his resurrection, shall never find other resurrection but to shame and torment.  
But on the contrary, the Orthodox Professors in the Chrrstian Church, not only have believed this Article, and stood up in defence thereof to the last drop of their blood, as often as the Princes of the earth have conspired together against the Lord and his anointed: but for the better imprinting of it in the souls of simple and unlearned people, and for perpetual commemoration of so great a mercy, did institute the feast of Easter. A festival of all others the most ancient in the Christian Church, ordained and celebrated in the purest ages of the same, while some of the Apostles were yet living. A feast received with so unanimous affection throughout the world, that though some difference happened about the time when it should be celebrated; yet there was never any question made of the feast itself. All of them kept an Easter, though not all at a time: some of the Eastern Churches in compliance with the jews amongst whom they lived, keeping it on the 14. day of the Moon, as the jews did the Passeover: ●ll other Churches keeping it on the Sunday after, in memory of the day of the resurrection. Nor was there ever any sect or body of Heretics, but they kept the festival: no not so much as the Novatians (or Cathari as they call themselves) but they kept an Easter 
(b) Socrat. hist. Eccl. l. 5. c. 20. , though they left every one at liberty to keep it when he would, so he kept it at all, and therein differing from the Sect of the Quartodecimani, who urged it as a matter necessary, to celebrate it on the 14. day of the moon, and upon no other. The sharp contentions raised in the Primitive times about this point, and the great care took by the Prelates of those times to compose the difference, are proof sufficient for the estimation which they held it in, and the antiquity thereof, were there no proof else. And yet to set it clear above opposition, we find it upon good record, that it was not celebrated by the Church, not only during the lives of the Apostles, but also by some of them in person. For Polycarpus who conversed with the Apostles, and was made Bishop of Smyrna by them, (as Irenaeus 
(c) Iren. l. 3. c. 3. , and Tertullian 
(d) de Praescrip. c. 3.  do expressly say) affirmeth that he kept his Easter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, with St. john the Disciple of the Lord, and others of the Apostles in whose times he lived and conversed with them 
(e) Euseb. hist. Eccl. l. 5. c 14. ; St. john by name, the rest of the Apostles but in generals only. And so Polycrates the Metropolitan of Ephesus doth as plainly say, that St. Philip the Apostle kept it: and he not only was a Bishop of most eminent note, but a most famous Martyr also; and so not likely to sophisticate or report a falsehood. This makes it clear and evident that the feast of Easter is of Apostolical Institution, though possibly not ordained or instituted till toward the latter end of the first Century, if perhaps Philip lived so long as john doubtless did. To go a little higher yet, it was received for a truth in the time of Constantine, that Easter had been kept, (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) from the first day of our Saviour's passion, until the very time that good Emperor lived in 
(f) Id. de Vit. Constantini l. 3. : and more than so, that they received it from our Saviour, that Christ delivered it unto them. So that the institution of the feast of Easter is not only of Divine Apostolical right; but in the opinion of those times (and those the happiest of the Church both for peace and purity) of a divine right in the highest degree. Whether that so it were or not, I dispute not here, though possibly the high estimation which the Ancient Fathers held it in, and the honourable attributes which they give unto it, may seem to intimate some such matter. For St. Ignatius who lived near the Apostles times (if he lived not with them) calleth it expressly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(g) Ignat. Epist. ad Magnesianos. , the Lady and Queen of all the feasts; and that too in his Epistle ad Magnesianos, against which no exception hath been made as yet in this captious age. By Constantine it is called, the most holy feast, and that four times (for failing in one Epistle 
(h) Apud E●seb. de vita Const. l. 3. ): By Epiphanius, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(i) Epiphan. in Panar. prope finem. , the great solemnity. By Nazianzen, (to wander through no more particulars) it is not only termed the Queen and Sovereign of days 
(k) in Oratione funebri. , which it seems he borrowed from Ignatius; but thus set out and beautified in a fuller manner 
(l) Id in Orat. de Paschate. , Easter day is come (saith he) Gods own Easter day, and again I say Easter day is come, in honour of the blessed Trinity; the feast of feasts, the solemnity of all solemnities, as far surpassing all other feasts holden not only by or for men, but even in honour of Christ himself, as the sun the stars. Nor was this great festival only solemnised in the world abroad, but of as high an estimation also within this Island: the error of the Quartodecimani being condemned, and the custom of the Western Church asserted in the Council of Arles, (a Council of more antiquity though of less authority perhaps then that of Nice): to which subscribed amongst others 
(m) Tom. 1. Concil. Gall. a Sirmundo edit. , Euborius B. of York, Restitutus B. of London, and Adelfus B. of Colchester. And for the Scots, they did receive the observation of this Festival, together with the faith itself: Sedulius a learned man of that nation, who flourished not long after the conversion of it, writing a Poem which he entitled Opus Paschale, and did thus begin, Paschales quicunque dapes, etc. In fifteen hundred years and more from our Saviour's Passion never did man oppose or cry down this feast but Aerius only; who for this and other of his dotages was held to be an heretic and a madman too: his folly in this point being held so gross, that he had never any followers for aught I can find. So that the marvel is the greater, that after so long a tract of time, some people under colour of reformation, should put down this feast, and for the better and more effectual obtaining of their end therein, either extend the time of their Lent so far, as to bring it within the compass of that public fast; or else (as some have also done) forbid the Sacrament of the Lords supper to be administered on that day, under pains and penalties, to make it looked upon no otherwise than a common day. And yet the wonder is the more, that the same men who practise to beat down this feast with such heat and violence, being kept upon the very day of the resurrection, and consequently opus diei in die suo; should withal labour with the utmost of their power and cunning to cry up the Sunday (and screw it to as high a pitch as the jews did their Sabbath) which is but the Epitome or the Abstract of it. Of very congruity at the least, it is to be regarded more than an other Sunday; as was most notably observed by his sacred Majesty. Who ask whether they that preached at Holdenby house on Easter day, did preach according to the day of the resurrection; and being answered that they did not, he next desired to know what reason the new reformers had to put down Easter, and continue Sunday. For being both instituted by the same authority (viz. the authority of the Church of Christ) they might as well refuse to observe the weekly Sunday, as not keep this feast. The 
(n) Numb. Iii. p. 103.  Moderate Intelligencer tells us of the Question, but I never yet could hear any Answer to it (though his Majesty gave it them in writing) and I believe I never shall.    

ARTICLE VII. Of the Seventh ARTICLE OF THE CREED Ascribed to St. BARTHOLOMEW. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. i e. Ascendit ad Coelum, sedet ad dextram Dei, Patris Omnipotentis. i e. He Ascended into Heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty.  

CHAP. XI. Of the Ascension of our Saviour; with a Discussion of the points and other Circumstances, which are most considerable in the same.  
THE next great Festivals after Easter, (which is the Anniversary feast of the Resurrection are those of the Ascension of our Lord and Saviour, and the coming of the holy Ghost, or the Feast of Whitsuntide. Which method of the Church in these great solemnities, seems to be borrowed from the method of the Creed which we have before us: wherein unto the Article of the Resurrection, is presently subjoined, that he ascended into Heaven, there sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty, and there shall tarry and abide until he come to judge both the quick and the dead, and after that the Article of the holy Ghost. And there was good reason for this too. For therefore did our blessed Saviour raise himself from the shame and obloquy of the grave, that he might ascend in glory to the Heaven of Heavens: that being gone from thence and ascended thither 
(a) Joh. 14, 15▪ 16. & 16.7. , he might send them (as he had foresignified) another Comforter, that should abide with them for ever. And as it seems, the Royal Psalmist, the sweet singer of Israel, foresaw the near conjunction of those two great Festivals; the necessary dependence which the coming of the holy Ghost had on Christ's Ascension. Thou art gone up on high (saith he) thou hast led Captivity Captive, and received gifts for men, that the Lord God might dwell amongst them 
(b) Psal. 68.18. . So that the Text beginneth with the ascending of CHRIST, and ends with the descending of the holy Ghost. For if a man should ask, as the Eunuch did, of whom doth the Prophet speak this; of himself or of some other man? we must needs answer with St. Philip, and say that it relateth unto Jesus Christ. That so it is, we have St. Paul to be our warrant, who thus citys the Text with reference unto Christ the Lord; When he ascended up on high 
(c) Ephes. 4.8. , he led captivity captive; and gave gifts to men. He received gifts for men saith the Psalmist, he gave gifts to men saith the Apostle, He did re●eive them of his Father, that he might give them unto us. Well then, what gifts are they? that he tells us after, 
(d) Ver. 10, 11.  And he gave some (to be) Apostles, and some Prophets, and some Evangelists, and some Pastors, and Teachers, to the gathering together of the Saints, to the work of the Ministration, and to the edifying of the Body of Christ These were the gifts which Christ conferred upon his Church by the holy Ghost, first by his first descent or coming upon Whitsunday, when he gave Apostles and Evangelists, falling upon their heads in likeness of cloven tongues 
(e) Act. 2.3. , and ever since by furnishing the Pastors and Teachers of it with those gifts and graces of the Spirit, which are expedient for their Calling. And this is evident enough from the Psalmists words, where it is said, that He received gifts for men that the Lord God might dwell amongst them. Which cannot be applied unto Christ himself: for than it must not have been said that he had ascended up on high, and was parted from us; but that he tarried here below, to be always with us. Therefore God here, must needs he God the holy Ghost, who came not down till after Christ was gone up, and then came down no● only to remain among us, but to be in us, saith our Saviour, and to abide with us for ever 
(f) Joh. 14.17.16. : So that this Text containing (as you see it doth) the substance and occasion of these two great Festivals; we will begin first with the holy Thursday, part thereof, which is Christ's Ascension, according as the method of the Creed doth lead me. Where by the way, the Feast of holy Thursday, of the Lords Ascension, is of as great Antiquity as eminency in the Christian Church, it being reckoned by St. Augustine 
(g) August. Epistola 118.  amongst those feasts: and there were but four of them in all, which had been generally received in all ages past, and thought to be of Apostolical Institution.  
Now for this great act of the Ascension, St. Mark delivereth it in brief, that When he had spoken unto them, he was received into heaven, and sat him down on the right hand of God 
(h) Mar. 16.19. : St. Luke, a little more fully, in his Gospel thus, that he led them out into Bethany, and blessed them 
(i) Luk. 24.50. , and it came to pass that as he blessed them, he departed from them and was carried up into Heaven. But in the Acts the story is laid down at large, and with more particulars. There we are told that from the time of his Resurrection he continued forty days upon the earth 
(h) Act. 1. , appearing many times in that space or Interim unto his Apostles, and speaking to them of the Kingdom of God; that on the fortieth day he led them to a Mount which is called Olivet, being from Jerusalem a Sabbath days journey, (which some conceive to be a mile, or but two at most) that being there, and speaking unto his Apostles about the Kingdom of Israel, while they beheld he was taken up on high, and a Cloud received him out of their sight; And finally that as they followed him with their eyes towards Heaven, behold two men stood by them in white apparel, which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into Heaven, This same JESUS which is taken up from you into Heaven, shall so come, even as ye see him go into Heaven. This is the substance of the story; in which we have some passages to be further looked on, and others to be reconciled with the Creed, from which they seem in words to differ. For first whereas it is said, that he appeared unto them forty days 
(l) Act. 1.3. , which is not to be so interpreted, as if he showed himself unto them every one of those days; but that in the said forty days from his Resurrection, frequenter see eyes vīd●●dum exhibuerat 
(m) Estius in Act. 1. , he had offered himself to them oftentimes to be by them, and to discourse with them of the things of the Kingdom of God. In the next place, St. Luke who tells us in the Acts, that our Saviour made his ascent from the Mount of Olives, informs us in the Gospel, that it was at Bethany. Which difference is easy to be reconciled, would there were no worse. For Bethanie was a village near unto Jerusalem, about fifteen furlongs from it 
(n) Joh. 18 18. , as the Text instructs us; and seated at the foot of the Mount called O●ivet: In which respect it is called Bethanie at the Mount of Olives, Mark. 1.1. So that whether Mount Olivet was esteemed to be within the limits and precincts of the Village of Bethanie, or Bethanie was reckoned for the lower part of the Mount of Olives, it comes all to one. But the main point to be considered is the seeming difference, which is between the words of the Creed and the words of the Gospel. Ascendit ad Coelum, saith the Creed, he ascended into Heaven, 'tis his own act here. Assumptus est in Coelum, saith St. Mark, ferebatur in Coelum, saith St. Luke's Gospels, elevatus est, saith the Book of the Acts, he was carried up into Heaven, or taken up on high, as our English reads it, it was Gods act there. And so it was indeed, it was Gods and his: the Persons having such an interest in one another, that what was done by the one is ascribed to the other without wrong or prejudice to either: as it is also in the case of the Resurrection; in which although we find it to be his own act, his Resurrexit only in the holy Gospels; yet is it quem Deus suscitavit a mortuis 
(o) Act. 3. 1●. , him hath God raised from the dead in St. Peter's Sermon. Or else it may be answered thus, that though our Saviour did ascend by his own power and virtue, yet he may properly be said to be assumptus, taken or carried up into Heaven in three regards; that is to say 
(p) Estius in Mark. 16. , either as taken up on the wings of Angels (whereof we shall say more anon) as Lazarus was carried into Abraham's bosom; or because he seemed to be wrapped up in a cloud, and so taken up out of their sight; or finally that the man CHRIST JESUS was taken up into Heaven by the power and virtue of the Godhead in separably united to him. Either of these constructions will atone the difference, and reconcile the Creed with the words of the Text: though we may further add, and ex abundanti, that St. Luke doth not only say ferebatur in Coelum, or he was carried up into Heaven, as if he were passive in it only; but that Recessit ab iis first 
(q) Luk. 24.51. , he left them of his own accord, gave the first rise to his Ascension, and after ferebatur (for so it followeth) suffered himself to be assumpted, taken or carried up into Heaven, either by the Cloud or by the Angels, or how else he pleased. Lastly, it is to be observed, that he ascended into Heaven, videntibus illis saith the Text, whilst his Apostles looked on: to signify that he did ascend by little and little, that he might feed their eyes, and refresh their souls, and by his leisurely ascent, make them more able to attest it, as occasion served. For had he been caught up into Heaven as Elias was 
(r) 2 King. 2.11. , who had but one witness to affirm it, or rapt up into Heaven, as St. Paul was afterwards, without any witness but himself, and scarce that neither, (for whether it were in the body, or out of the body 
(s) 2 Cor. 12.3. , he could hardly tell): the truth thereof had wanted much of that estimation, which the mouths of so many witnesses as beheld the mir●●le, were able to afford unto it.  
And yet it was strange that many witnesses should need to confirm that truth, which had so clearly been fore-signified both by Types and Prophecies, that none who did believe the Scriptures could make question of it. For if we look upon the Substance or the quod ●it of it: or on the circumstances of the time, the place, the cloud, the pomp and manner of the same; or finally on the consequent or effect thereof as to Christ himself; we find all signified beforehand in the Book of God: and that so fully and expressly as must needs convince the jews of the greatest obstinacy, that ever had been entertained in the hearts of men: first in the way of Type or Figure, we have that of Enoch before the Law, and that of Elias under the Law. Of Enoch it is said in the holy Scripture, that he walked with God 
(t) Gen. 5.24. , that is to say, as the text doth expound itself in the case of Noah, he was a just man, and perfect in his generation 
(u) Gen. 6.9. , for the times he lived in. So righteous was he as it seems in the sight of God, that we find no mention of his death. Only the Scriptures say, that he was not found, because God took him: i. e. because God took him to himself, translating him both body and soul to his heavenly Kingdom. And so St. Paul expounds it, saying, 
(x) Heb. 11.5.  By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death, neither was he found, because God had taken him. And of Elijah it is said, that being talking with Elisha, one of his Disciples, there appeared a Chariot of fire, and horses of fire 
(y) 2 King. 2.11. , and parted them asunder, and that Elijah went up in a whirlwind into Heaven. Here than we have two Types or figures of the Lords Ascension, the one delivered in the person of a righteous man, who was unblameable in his conversation; walking in the commandments of God without reproof; the other of a Prophet mighty both in WORD AND WORK, who did not only reprove sin, and foretell of things which were to come, but did confirm his Doctrine with signs and miracles. And being that the jews cannot but confess, as josephus did, that Christ was not only a wise man, a Teacher of the people in the ways of truth, one that wrought miracles 
(z) joseph. de Antiq. judaic. l. 18.4. , and had gained many both of the jews and Gentiles to adhere unto him; being they cannot but acknowledge of our Saviour Christ, as the good Thief did, ille autem nil mali fecit 
(a) Luk. 23.42. , that he had done nothing amiss; or as Pilate, that there was no fault to be found in him 
(b) Luk. 23.4. : they have no reason but to think that Enoch and Elijah were the Types of the Lords Ascension, aswell as of his life and doctrine. But here perhaps it will be objected, that either Enoch and Elijah were not taken up into Heaven, and so no Types and figures of the Lords Ascension: or if they were, than was not Christ the first which opened the gates of Heaven, and ascended thither in his body, to make a way for others in due time to follow; as all Antiquity in a manner do affirm he was, grounding their judgement on the evident and plain texts of Scripture. For doth not the Apostle expressly say, that the way into the Holiest of all was not yet manifest, while the first Tabernacle was yet standing, Heb. 9.8. And doth not Christ our Saviour as expressly say, that no man had ascended into Heaven, but he that came down from Heaven, even the Son of man, joh. 3.13. How then were Enoch and Elijah Types of Christ's Ascension, if they were not taken up into Heaven? or how was Christ the first, if they there before him? Our Saviour Christ himself makes answer unto this objection, where he saith, that in his Father's house there were many mansions 
(c) Joh. 14.2. : that is to say, several degrees of happiness and estates in glory, though all most glorious in themselves. To some of which degrees of happiness, and estates in glory, unto some one or other of those heavenly Mansions, both Enoch and Elijah were by God translated, there's no doubt of that; the Scripture is expressly for it. But that they were in Coelosummo, in the highest Heaven, that unto which the Lord ascended, and where he now sitteth at the right hand of God the Father, that as the Scriptures do not say, so there is no necessity why we should believe it. Our Saviour was the first who ascended thither; that place of supreme glory being typified in the Sanctum Sanctorum, and by that entitled, as before we saw, unto which none might enter but the High Priest only.  
From Types proceed we next unto the way of Prophecy, and there we find assured proof not only for the Substance of the Lords Ascension, but for every Circumstance. First for the substance, thus saith the Prophet David, Psal. 24. Lift up your heads O you gates, and be you lift up you Everlasting doors, and the King of Glory shall come in. Who is the King of Glory? the Lord strong and mighty, the Lord mighty in battle. Which Psalm as it was framed by that sweet singer of Israel, on the reduction of the Ark to the City of David, and literally meant of the Gates of the Tabernacle, through which the Ark, the glory of the Lord of Hosts, was to have its entrance; so was it mystically and Prophetically spoken of our Saviour Christ, who in a mighty battle had subdued all the powers of hell; and afterwards by his Ascension did set open the Gates of Heaven; as all the Fathers generally down from justin Martyr, do expound the place. The Gates were lift up in the Psalm, for the King of glory, and opened in the Gospel for the Lord of glory 
(d) 1 Cor. 2.8. , as the Apostle with some reference to the Psalmist calls him. Where by the way, I think we need not go much further to resolve a doubt, which hath been made by some in the Church of Rome; that is to say, whether the Heavens did open to make way to our Saviour's passage, an vero sine diversione eos penetravit 
(e) Estius in Mar. 16. , or that he pierced or passed through the Celestial bodies, as they conceive he came unto his Disciples when the doors were shut. The reason of this query we know well enough, It is to help them at a pinch when they are put to it, in maintenance of that monstrous Paradox of Transubstantiation, which utterly destroys the being of Christ's natural body. But unto this, the lifting up of the Gates gives a ready answer, and such an answer as hath countenance from the Gospel also. For if the Heavens were opened to make way for the Spirit of God to descend upon him at his Baptism 
(f) Mat. 3.16. , as we know it was: with how much greater reason must they then be opened, when he ascended into Heaven not in Spirit only, but also in his body, in his humane nature? Next for the circumstances which occur in the Lord's Ascension, we have the time thereof, the fortieth day precisely from his Resurrection, prefigured in the forty days of respite which God gave to Nineveh, before he purposed to destroy it. The correspondence or resemblance doth stand thus between them, that as God gave the Ninivites forty days of Repentance, after the miraculous deliverance of jonah from the belly of the Whale, had (in all probability) been made known unto them to confirm his Preaching: so he gave forty days to the jews also after Christ's Resurrection, to see if they would turn from their sins, or not; before he did withdraw the presence of their Saviour from them, and lay them open to that desolation, which he had denounced against them for their wickedness. And this I am the more confirmed in by another passage of this kind, in the Book of Ezekiel, where it is said, Thou shalt bear the iniquity of the house of Judah forty days 
(g) Ezek. 4. ●. , I have appointed thee each day for an year. Which Prophecy what ever it might aim at, at that present time in which it was declared by the mouth of the Prophet; was questionless most punctually fulfilled in those forty days, which Christ continued on the earth until his Ascension. For having born those forty days the iniquities of the house of judah, and kept off by his presence all those plagues and punishments, which were due unto them for the same: he left them unto that destruction, which at the end of forty years, (reckoning each day for an year, as the Prophet bids us) befell both their Temple, and their Nation. For the place next, we find it on record in the Prophet Zachary, in these words, 
(h) Zach. 14.4▪  His feet shall stand in that day upon the Mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the East, and the Mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof. Which part of the Prophecy concerning the feet of God, which were to stand on the Mount of Olives, was never before so literally verified, as in the day of o●r Saviour's Ascension: his sacred feet making such an impression on the ground where he took his rise (if I may so say) as seemed to cleave the ground in twain, and there continued for the space of four hundred years, if the Tradition of the Ancients be of any credit. Certain I am that so it is affirmed by Paulinus, no fabulous Writer, but of a very great esteem for piety in the best times of the Church; and he tells it thus. 
(i) Paulinus Epist. 11. ad Severum.  Mirum vero inter haec, quod in Basilica Ascensionis locus ille tantum, de quo in nube susceptus ascendit, ita sacratus divinis vestigiis dicitur, ut nunquam tegi marmore, aut paviri receperit, semper excussis, se respuente, quae manus adornandi study tentavit apponere. Itaque in toto Basilicae spacio, solus in sui caespitis specie virens permanet, & impressam divinorum pedum venerationem calcati Deo pulveris perspicua simul & irrigua venerantibus conservat. I have put down the words at large on the Author's credit, and so commit them to the censure of the learned Reader. Then for the cloud in which our Saviour made his Ascent to Heaven, we have it thus fore-signified by the Prophet Daniel. 
(k) Dan. 7.13, 14▪  Behold (saith he) one like unto the Son of man, came in the Clouds of Heaven, and approached unto the ancient of days, and they brought him before him. And he gave him Dominion, and honour, and a Kingdom, that all people, Nations, and languages should serve him; his Dominion is an everlasting Dominion which shall never be taken away, and his Kingdom shall never be destroyed. Where, by the way, we have a full description of that power and honour, which God conferred upon our Saviour; and by St. Mark is intimated in that form of speech 
(l) Mar. 16.19. , and sat down on the right hand of God. But this I touch but on the by; referring the full disquisition of it to the next branch of this Article, to which it properly belongeth.  
In the mean time let us behold the pomp and ceremony of the Lords Ascension, which David hath described in the words before, that is to say, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and received gifts for men; He gave gifts to men, saith the great Apostle; which how they do agree was before delivered. In which it seems to me, that the sacred Penmen have made the course and order of the Lords Ascension, like to the pomp and glory of the ancient Triumphs. It was, we know, the custom of the ancient Romans, when any of their Generals did return victorious against a powerful and considerable enemy, to honour him with a Triumphant reception into the City of Rome. The pomp and manner of which was, that the General apparelled in a garment of state called Trabea, or Vestis Triumphalis, and having on his head a garland of laurel, and sometimes a Crown of gold which the Senate had bestowed upon him, was carried in a rich and open Chariot: the Senators, and others of the principal Citizens going forth to meet him, and conduct him, in the spoils and treasures gotten in the war passing on before; the soldiers with their Coronets, their bracelets and other military rewards following next the General, and in the Rear of all, those miserable men whether Kings or others, whom the unlucky chance of war had now made Captives. Examples of this kind in the Roman stories are obvious to the eye of every Reader. And such as this, (if I may safely venture upon such comparisons) is the Ascension of the Lord described to be by the Royal Psalmist. He made a chariot of the clouds and so ascended up on the wings of the wind; apparelled in the Robe of his own righteousness, more glorious than a Raiment of needlework, wrought about with divers colours; and having on his head that Crown of eternal Majesty, which the Lord God his Heavenly Father had conferred upon him, in testimony of that Sovereign power over Heaven and Earth, which he since hath exercised. But of this we shall speak more anon. To make his entrance into Heaven the more magnificent, the Blessed Angels those great Citizens of the new Jerusalem did attend upon him: conducting him into the place of endless glories, as erst they had done Lazarus into Abraham's bosom. St. Austin so affirmed it, saying 
(m) August. in Psal. 90.  Sublatus est Christus in manibus Angelorum, etc. The Lord was carried up by the hands of Angels, when he ascended into Heaven; not that he would have fallen had not they supported, but that they might serve him in that work; so saith St. Athanasius for the Greek Church also, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(n) Athanas. contra Arianos. , etc. that being carried up by Angels, he ascended thither as man, and took our flesh upon him into Heaven. 
(o) Cypri. de Asc. Christi.  St. Cyprian saith, that though he did not need the Angels to support or carry him, yet that they did attend him in that glorious triumph; and praecedentes & subsequentes applaudebant victori: And thereto Nazianzen agrees also; if Christ ascend (saith he) to Heaven, ascend thou with him, and join thyself unto the Angels, which did accompany him or receive him. Take which of these you will, and we find the Angles to have no small part in our Saviour's Triumph. And certainly it stood with reason, that they who had ministered unto him in the whole course of life, when he did seem to be in disgrace and poverty, should have the honour to attend him in the time of his glories: and if we do observe it well, we shall find no special passage of our Saviour's life, in which the blessed Angels did not do him service. An Angel served to usher in his incarnation 
(p) Luk. 1.28. , to proclaim his birth unto the Shepherds 
(q) Luk. 1.10. , to join in consort with the rest of the Choir of Heaven, and sing the Anthem of Gloria in excelsis Deo. No sooner was he born, but all the Angels of the Lord did adore and worship him 
(r) Heb. 1.6. , saith St. Paul to the Hebrews, when he had overcome the Devil in the Wilderness, the Angels came and ministered unto him 
(s) Mat. 4.11. , as St. Matthew hath it; and being at his last conflict with him in the garden of Gethsamene, an Angel of the Lord did come down to comfort him 
(t) Luk. 22.43. . To testify unto the truth of his resurrection, we have two Angels clothed in white 
(u) Joh. 20.12. , proclaiming this glad news that the Lord was risen; and here we have two men in white, (which were Angels doubtless) assuring the Apostles of their Lord's ascension. Not that there were no more than two, because no more spoke of; but that two only stayed behind to testify unto the truth of so great a miracle Who as they also certified them, in the way of prediction, that in the same manner as he went from thence into heaven, he should return again in the day of judgement; so in that day they shall not only wait upon him, but have their special place and ministry, as we shall see hereafter in the following Article.  
But in our Saviour's train there were more than Angels. To make this triumph answerable to the former Platform, there must be Soldiers also to attend his Chariot, which must receive their several rewards and crowns, for their well deservings; and captives there must be to be led in triumph, and to be made a spectacle unto men and Angels. And so there was, Ignatius telleth us in plain terms 
(x) Ignat. Epist, ad Trallian. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that he went down (to hell) alone, but he ascended to his father with a great train after him. And before him Thaddeus, whom St. Thomas the Apostle sent to the Prince of Edessa, used the self same words 
(y) Euseb. Hist. Eccl. l. 1, c. 13. . More company there was then, than the holy Angels, of more sorts at least: (for those of whom Thaddeus and Ignatius spoke, were such as did ascend from the parts below) but who these were, hath been a matter much disputed in these latter times. Shall we affirm, as generally the Papists do, that they were the souls of the Fathers who died under the Law, whom our redeemer brought from Limbo when he went down into hell? I think we need not be reduced into that strait neither. And as for my opinion in that point, it hath been shown already in another place 
(z) See Chap. 8. of this second part. . All I shall add now in brief is this, that they which did ascend in our Saviour's train, and made up a great part of his glorious triumph; were either his Soldiers, or his Captives. His Soldiers I call those of the Saints departed, whose graves were opened at the time of his resurrection, who being united to their body's rose, and came out of the their graves 
(a) Mat. 27.53. , and went into the holy City, and appeared unto many. It was not probable that they were raised from the dead, to die again; much less to be left wandering up and down the earth, as if they had no certain ubi to repair unto. Nor could they ascend into the heavens before our Saviour; who as in all things, so in that also was to have the preeminence. They must then ascend with him as a part of his train; and go in with the Bridegroom, as the wise Virgins did, when the doors were open. For my part I can see no reason why, being made partakers of his resurrection, they should be rejected, or cast off at his ascension. That they were Saints, whose bodies had been raised by so great a miracle, is affirmed expressly in the text; and therefore were in some possession of the heavenly glories. And that their bodies had been putrefyed, and some of them perhaps reduced to their primitive dust, is more than probable, for the text speaks of them as of men which had long been dead. Now why a glorified soul should be reunited to a corrupt and putrefyed (although new raised) body, unless it were to raise that body also to a share of glory; I plainly must confess I can see no reason. Some of the Saints then, as his Soldiers, did attend this Pomp; I take that for granted: And I conceive it probable (for I go no further) that every Saint or Soldier had his Crown or Coronet bestowed upon them by their General, in testimony that they had fought a good fight against sin and Satan. For though in common course the Saints and servants of the Lord shall not have their Crowns until the general day of judgement; yet here in this particular case it might be otherwise, by special privilege and extraordinary dispensation.  
Next to the Saints and Soldiers look we on the Captives, of whom the Psalmist and St. Paul both do expressly speak, Duxit captivam captivitatem. He led captivity captive, saith the holy Scripture. But who these captives were, and what this captivity, will ask a little more pains to declare aright; though somewhat hath been said in this point before. We showed you in our Commentaries on the former Articles, that by the unanimous consent of all the Fathers, our Saviour spoiled the Principalities and powers of hell, when he went down thither; and there took captive both the Devil and his evil Angels. The showing of them openly, and triumphing over them, the leading of them captive when they were so taken, that doubtless was the work of another day, that was the work of the Ascension. When he ascended up on high, then, not before, he led them captive; and when he led them captive, than he triumphed over them. The victory he obtained before, now he made his triumph. The great Battle which Paulus Aemilius won of Perseus the Macedonian, did shrewdly shake the main foundations of his power and Empire; the victory was not perfected, nor the Realm subdued, and made a Tributary Province of the state of Rome, until the King himself was taken, in the Isle of Samothrace, to which he had retired as his strongest hold, immediately on his defeat near the City of Pidna. The triumph followed not till after when he made his entry into Rome, the imperial City: the miserable King and all the flower of his Nobility, being led like Captives in their chains, and doomed unto perpetual prison. And this saith the Historian was interpulcherrimos 
(c) L. Florus hist. l. 2. c. 12. , the happiest and most stately triumph that the Roman people ever saw, the victory having also been of the greatest consequence. So in this case. The first main Battle (after some previous skirmishes and velitations) which our Redeemer sought with Satan, was upon the Cross, in which he seemed for a time to have had the worse. But it was only for a time. For by his death (saith the Apostle) 
(d) Heb. 2.4.  he overcame him which had power of death, which was the Devil. That was the first great blow which the Devil had. But the victory was not perfected, nor the Empire of the Prince of darkness broke in pieces, and brought under the command of the Son of man; till he mastered hell itself, and forced the Devil and his Angels in their strongest hold. Then came he to demand his triumph at the hands of God, who received him into heaven with the greatest glory, that ever had been seen by the heavenly Citizens: the Devil and rest of the powers of hell being led bound in chains in triumphant wise; whom he flung off as soon as he approached near the gates of Heaven, and hath ever since reserved in chains under darkness, to the judgement of the great and terrible day 
(e) Judas v. 6. . If you will see this triumph set down more at large, we have it in the 13. of the Prophet Hosea, and out of him in St. Paul's first to the Corinthians 
(f) 1 Cor. 15.55. : death led captive without his sting; Hell, broken and defaced, like the picture of a conquered City; the strength of sin, (the Law) rend, and fastened to his Cross ensigne-wise; the Serpent's head broken, and so born before him, as was Goliahs' head by David when he came from the victory. Never so great a victory, such a glorious triumph; as that of Christ in his Ascension, when having spoilt the Principalities and powers of hell, he led this captivity captive in his march to Heaven, making a show of them openly unto men and Angels, and triumphing over them in semet ipso, in his own person, saith the vulgar. Reddunt inferna victorem, & superna suscipiunt triumphantem 
(g) Serm. de tempore. 138. , Hell restored him back a Conqueror, and Heaven received him a Triumpher, as faith St. Angustine happily, if the work be his.  
But there were other Captives which adorned this triumph, besides the Devil and his Angels, even the sons of men. The Devil first began the war with our Father Adam, foiled him in Paradise, and made him of a Prince to become a Prisoner, a slave to his own lusts and and loose affections. And he prevailed so far upon his posterity, that he brought all mankind in a manner under his dominion; their sins and wickednesses being grown unto such an height, that God repented him at last of man's creation; It angered him, saith the text, at the very heart. David complained in his time, that there was none that did good, no not one 
(h) Psal. 14.3. ; and when the son of David came upon the Theatre, he found the seed of Abraham so degenerated, that they were become the slaves of Satan, at best the children of the Devil, as himself affirmed. In this estate we were, the whole race of man, when with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm, our Saviour Christ encountered with the powers of darkness, and subdued them all. By this great victory of Christ over sin and Satan, the Devil was not only taken and made a Captive, but all mankind, even that captivity which was captive under him, became his Prisoners jure belli, even by the common law of war; as being before part of the Devil's goods, of his train and vassalage. So true is that of Aristotle, in his book of Politics, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(k) Pol. l. 1. c. 4. , those which are taken in the wars are in the power, and at the pleasure of the Conqueror. The Fathers, many of them, look this way directly, but none more plainly to this purpose then Dorotheus an old Orthodox writer, and he states it thus, What means (saith he) the leading of captivity captive? And then he answereth 
(l) Doroth. de Paschate. c. 12. , It meaneth that by Adam's transgression, the enemy had made us all captives and held us in subjection, and that Christ took us again out of the enemy's hands, and conquered him who kept us captive. So that the case of mankind in this double captivity, was like that of Lot, whom the five Kings when they took Sodom carried Prisoner with them, Lot was then Captive to those Kings. But presently comes Abraham 
(m) Gen. 14.16 , falls upon the Victors, takes the five Kings, and with them Let also Prisoner; by means whereof both Lot and they became Abraham's captives, to be disposed of as he pleased who had got the mastery. So was it with the sons of men, till they were rescued from the Devil by this son of Abraham. We were the miserable children of this captivity. They to whom we were captives were taken captive themselves, and we with them. So both came into Christ's hands, were both made his Prisoners; and both accordingly led in triumph on this glorious day. Both indeed led in triumph, but with this great difference. Their being led in triumph) was to their confusion; they were condemned also, as we saw before, to perpetual prisons, there to expect the torments of the day of judgement. We by this new captivity were released of our old, restored unto the glorious liberty of the sons of God. And this was felix captivitas capi in bonum, a fortunate Captivity that fell out so happily. And yet it did not end so neither, as if the giving of us our lost liberty had been all intended; though we perhaps had been contented well enough, had it been no more.  
One part of this great triumph doth remain behind, the dona dedit of the Psalmist, the scattering of his gifts and Largesse amongst his people, (Missilia the old Romans called them) to make his conquest the more acceptable to all sorts of men. And this he could not do until his Ascension, till he had took possession of the heavenly palaces; Every good and perfect gift coming from above 
(n) Jam. 1.17. , as St. james hath told us. I speak not of those gifts here which concern the Church, the body collective of the Saints, the whole Congregation; The giving of those gifts was the work of Whitsuntide, when the Apostles received gifts for the public Ministry, and for the benefit of the Church in all times succeeding. I speak of such gifts only now, as concern particulars, which he conferreth upon us with a liberal hand, according to our wants, and his own good pleasure. Are we in danger of our enemies? By being ascended into heaven he is the better able to deliver us from them; for standing on the higher ground he hath got the vantage, from whence he can rain down fire and brimstone on them 
(o) Psal. 11.6. , if he think it necessary. Ascensor Coeli auxiliatur, He that rid upon the Clouds to Heaven is our help and refuge, saith Moses in the Book of Deuteronomy. Are we in want of necessaries to sustain our lives? He shall send down a gracious rain upon his inheritance 
(p) Psal. 68 ●. , the former and the latter rain, as the Prophet calls it. Are we unfurnished of such graces as are fit for our Christian calling? Out of the fullness (of his treasure) shall we all receive 
(r) Joh. 1.16. , and that too grace for grace, saith the great Evangelist: that is to say, not all of us one and the same grace, but diversi diversam, to every man his several and particular grace, as Maldonate (and I think very happily) doth expound the Text. For unto one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom, and to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit: To another working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits, to another divers kinds of tongues 
(s) 1 Cor. 12.8 etc. . To one a supereminent faith, to another an abundant charity; to every man some gift or other, the better to prepare him for his way to Heaven, and make him the more welcome at his coming thither. And this indeed is the main gift we are to look for, the greatest benefit we can receive by Christ's ascensun. All other gifts are but in order unto this, to provide heaven for us. In that he is ascended into heaven in our humane nature, he lets us know that heaven is to be ascended, and that our nature is made capable of the like ascension; if we have ascensiones in cord 
(t) Psal. 84.5.  first, and ascend up to him in our hearts by saith and piety. Nay therefore did our Saviour ascend into heaven, that he might show us the way thither, bespeak our entertainment for us, and prepare our lodging. I go (saith he) to prepare a place for you, joh. 14.3. And so perhaps he might do and we never the better; he might prepare the place, and we not come at it. He tells them therefore in plain terms, If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again 
(u) Joh. 14.3. , and receive you unto myself, that where I am there ye may be also. This is indeed the greatest fruit and benefit which redounds to us by Christ's Ascendit in altum, by his ascending up on high. He overcame the sharpness of death by his resurrection; by his ascension he set open the Kingdom of heaven unto all believers, that where he is we may be also. Such other of the fruits and effects hereof, as be in ordine to this, will fall more fitly under the consideration of the next branch of this Article, his sitting at the right hand of God the Father, and till than we leave them.  
In the mean time it will be fitting for us to take up that Psalm of David, and sing Non nobis Domine, non nobis, that this great work was not wrought for our sakes alone 
(x) Psal. 115.1. . There is a Nomini tuo da gloriam to be looked on too; somewhat which Christ acquired thereby unto himself, that must be considered. He was made lower than the Angels in his humane nature; not to be crowned with immortality and glory, till in his humane nature he ascended into heaven. All power had formerly been given him, both in heaven and earth 
(y) Mat. 28.18. . He had a jus ad rem, then when he sojourned here. The exercise of this authority, or the jus in re, at least the perfect manifestation of it in the eyes of men, was not till he had took possession of the heavens themselves, the Palace royal of his kingdom. jesus he was, a Saviour from his very birth; acknowledged by St. Peter for the Christ of God, and in his mouth by all the rest of the Apostles. Yet find we not that they looked otherwise on him then as some great Prophet; or at the most, a Prince in posse, if all things went well with him. They never took him for their God and Lord, (though many times they did for their Lord and master) nor did they worship and adore him, until his ascension. Then the text saith indeed they did it, but before that never. And it came to pass, saith St. Luke 
(z) Luk. 24.51, 52. , that while he blessed them he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven; and they worshipped him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy. The Papists make a great dispute about this question, An Christus sibi aliquid meruerit, i. e. Whether Christ merited any thing for himself, or for mankind only. In the true meaning of the word, and not as they mean merited, it is plain he did. For properly mereri is no more than consequi, to obtain or procure; and in that sense the word is generally used in ancient writers; of which we may see more hereafter, in a place more proper. Take this of Tacitus once for all, where speaking of Agricola he gives this Item, Illis virtutibus iram C. Caesaris meritus est 
(a) Tacit. in vita Agricol. , that by those virtues he procured the displeasure of Caius Caesar. That Christ did merit for himself in this sense of the word, I take to be a matter beyond all controversy. For first, he merited or procured, to be adored by his Apostles with religious worship; (the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the Greek Original) which he never could procure at their hands before. Maldonates' note upon this Text and the reasons of it, are in my mind exceeding apposite; but then his inference thereupon is like mors in olla, an herb that poisoneth the whole pottage. His note is this 
(b) Maldonat. in Luk. 24. , Non legimus nisi hoc loco, Christum a discipulis suis ado●atum, we do not read, saith he, but in this place only, that Christ was worshipped or adored by his Disciples. His reason of it is this, because whilst he conversed amongst them, they looked upon him only in his humane nature, as one made of the same mould that themselves were of. Nunc demum adorant cum in calum eum ferri vident, etc. But when they saw him taken up into heaven, they could not but acknowledge that he was a God also, and therefore was to be adored, which they did accordingly. So far the jesuit hath done well, none could do it better. His inference is, if I rightly understand his meaning, that the Eucharist is to be adored, though they of Rome are for so doing quarrelled by the modern Heretics. Assuredly were Transubstantiation an Article of the Christian faith, as that of Christ's ascension is well known to be; or could I see Christ in the the Eucharist with my bodily eyes, as the Apostles saw him when he went up into heaven; none should be forwarder than myself to adore the Eucharist. But our great Masters in that Church do affirm unanimously that there is nothing to be seen but the outward elements, the accidents of bread and wine, as they please to phrase it. And Suares, one of the greatest of their Clerks, doth affirm in Terminis 
(c) Suares in Thomam. 3. disp. 50. , Ho tantum pendet ex principiis Metaphysicis & Philosophicis, & ad fidei doctrinam non pertinet, that Transubstantiation doth depend only on Metaphysical and Philosophical principles, and is not the fide, or a matter of faith. Nay in the Church of Rome itself, neither the Pastors nor the people were bound to believe it till Innocent the third defined it in the Lateran Council, about 400 years ago; upon whose definition it doth wholly rest, as many of their Schoolmen 
(d) Scotus. Biel. Durand. alii.  cannot choose but grant, it being free till that time (saith the learned Tunstal once Ld. B. of Durram) to follow their own conjecture, concerning the manner of the presence 
(e) De verit. Corp. et Sangu. p. 46. . How all this doctrine doth agree with the Lords ascension, and how one overthrows and destroyeth the other, we shall more fully see in the close of this Chapter.  
Now therefore leaving these disputes, let us follow Christ in his Ascension, and see what he did further merit or procure for himself thereby. That he obtained to be adored by his Disciples, we have seen already; the next point that he gained was this, to be acknowledged by his followers for their Lord and King. So witnesseth St. Peter in his first Sermon 
(f) Act. 2. ●6. , saying, Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God hath made the same Jesus whom ye have crucified, both LORD AND CHRIST. Made him both Lord and Christ, but when? After his ascension, after he had exalted him, and placed him at his own right hand, as the foregoing verses balanced and compared together do most clearly evidence. What then? was he not Lord and Christ before? No not in fact, but only in the way of designation, as first begotten Son of God, and his heir apparent. Him he made heir of all things 
(g) Heb. 1.2. , from the first beginnings; but being as he was in the form of a servant, he was to do his Father's business, and attend his leisure. Who having raised him from the dead 
(h) Act. 5.36, 31. , exalted him (but not before) with his own right hand to be a Prince and Saviour, to give repentance unto Israel, and forgiveness of sins. Shall we have more? then to the Apostle of the jews add we him of the Gentiles, and he will tell us more at large 
(i) Ephes. c. 1. v. 20, 21, 22. , how first God raised him from the dead, then set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, far 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: lastly, that having so exalted him, he did put all things under his feet, and gave him to be head over all things to the Church which is his body. Now as he gained this power and Empire from the hands of God; so he obtained or merited obedience at the hands of men, the reverence of the knee in their adoration, the tribute of the tongue in their acclamations. Christ, saith the same Apostle, humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the Cross 
(k) Phil. 2.8, 9, 10, 11. . Which being suffered and subdued, God also highly hath exalted him, and given him a name above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth: And that every tongue should confess that JESUS CHRIST is the Lord, to the glory of God the Father. But here I must be understood of speaking all this while of the man CHRIST JESUS; as he appeared in our likeness 
(l) Ibid. v. 7, 8. , and was found in the fashion of us men; in which nature as he only suffered, and humbled himself unto the death, even the death of the Cross, for the remission of our sins: so in that nature only was he capable of an Exaltation, of being raised from the dead, and carried up into heaven, and placed there at the right hand of the Father almighty. Which sitting at the right hand of the Father Almighty, though it be another of those high preeminences, which Christ did merit for himself in his humane nature, yet being he was not actually possessed of it until his ascension; shall be considered by itself in the following Chapter, which is designed particularly to that branch of the Article. In the mean time, to show that all the steps of Christ's exaltation, are spoken and intended of his humane nature (whereof we shall speak more anon on the like occasion) take this of Ruffian as a taste of what others say, as well concerning this point of the Lords ascension into heaven, as that of sitting there at the right hand of God, both which he understandeth as the ancients did, of the manhood only, 
(m) Ruffin. in Symbol.  Neque enim ulli incorporeae naturae convenienter ista absque assumptione carnis aptantur: nec sedis coelestis perfectio Divinae naturae sed humanae conquiritur.  
It was then in his natural body that Christ ascended into heaven, in it he hath acquired, and for it, all those high preeminences, which have been formerly expressed: not altering thereby the nature which before it had, but adding a perfection of that glory which before it had not: and making it, though a natural body still, yet a body glorified. And this is generally agreed upon by all the fathers, affirming with a joint consent this most Catholic truth, that notwithstanding the accessions of immortality and glory to the body of Christ; yet it reserved still all the properties of a natural body. Christ (saith St. Hierome) ascended into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of the Father 
(n) Hieron. in Symbol. , manente ea natura carnis, the very same nature of his body remaining still, in which he was born, suffered, and did rise again. And then, Non enim exinanita est humanitatis substantia, sed glorificata. The substance of his body was not done away, but only glorified. St. Augustine as fully, but in fewer words, Christum corpori suo majestatem dedisse, naturam tamen corporis non ademisse; that Christ by giving majesty to his body, did not destroy the nature of it 
(o) Aug. Epist. ad Dardanum. . As plainly, but more fully in another place, Huic corpori immortalitatem dedit, naturam non abstulit. Christ, saith the Father, hath apparelled his flesh with immortality, but he hath not taken from it the nature of flesh. And therefore it concerneth us to take good heed, ne ita divinitatem astruamus hominis, ut veritatem corporis auferamus, not to maintain his divinity, on such faulty grounds, as utterly ruin his humanity; or so advance the man, as to spoil his body. Pope Leo to this purpose also 
(p) Leo Serm. de Resur. Domi. , Caro Christi ipsa est per essentiam, non ipsa per gloriam, The flesh or body of Christ in substance is the same it was, in glory it is not the same. Others might be produced to the same effect, were not these three sufficient to confirm a point so little subject to dispute amongst men of reason. And to say truth, the quarrel is not of the Thesis or the point itself, that the body of Christ retained still the properties of a natural body which before it had; but in the Hypothesis or supposition which is built upon it. For if our Saviour's body still retain the properties of a natural body, it must be circumscribed in a certain place, and have a local being as all bodies have. Otherwise by St. Augustine's rule it will be no body. For tolle ipsa corpora qualitatibus corporum, etc. 
(q) Aug. Epist. ad Dardanum.  Take away from bodies the properties of bodies, and there will be no place or ubi for them to be in, et ideo necesse est ut non sint, and then the same bodies must needs be no bodies. It followeth then upon this rule of that learned Father, that the body of Christ though glorified is a natural body, and consequently circumscribed in some place of heaven; and yet because a glorified body though a body natural, is so restrained to heaven and the glories of it, that no place else is capable of him. St. Augustine shall make good the first proposition, and St. Cyril the second; and then let Gratian make the Syllogism by adding a conclusion to the former premises. St. Augustine telleth us for the first, Ne dubites Christum esse in aliquo loco coeli, doubt not, saith he, but that the body of Christ is in some place of heaven 
(r) Id ibid. . Not doubt it, Why? Propter veri corporis modum, because it is agreeable unto the nature of a true body, that it should be so. St. Cyril for the second thus, Non poterat Christus cum Apostolis versari in carne, etc. 
(s) Cyril in joh. l. 11. c. 3.  Christ could not converse with his Apostles in his body or flesh, after he had ascended to his heavenly Father. The inference shall be made by Gratian, though in Augustine's words, Corpus in quo resurrexit in uno loco esse oportet 
(t) Grat. de Consecrat. Dist. 1. , The body in which Christ rose, must needs be in one place like to other bodies. Nor is this more, although it seem too much to the Pontificians, than what St. Peter said before in a Sermon of his, Oportet illum coelos capere 
(u) Act. 3.21. , viz. that the heavens must contain him till his coming again, till all things be restored and perfected in the day of the Lord. Which being so, it was unseasonably done of Pope Nicolas, to labour the introducing of the new article of Transubstantiation into the Creed, before he had expounded that of Christ's ascension; being so plainly contrary to that new devise, that they cannot both stand together in the same belief. And when Pope Pius the fourth did publish a new Creed of his own 
(x) Bulla Pii. IV. in Act. Concil. Trident. , and therein did requre this, amongst other Articles, that we believe that in the Sacrament of the Eucharist there is made a conversion of the whole substance of the bread into Christ's body, and of the wine into his blood, which conversion the Catholic Church calleth Transubstantiation: he considered neither how repugnant his new Creed would be to that which the Apostles had before delivered, nor how destructive to the works of God's Creation. For first, if Christ our Saviour be ascended in his natural body, and that the heavens are to contain him till his coming to judgement, as both the Scriptures and the Creed do expressly say: how can we have his body here upon the earth, as often as the Priest is pleased to offer, Hoc est corpus meum, without confuting both the Creed and the text together? Secondly, if the bread be transubstantiated into our Saviour's body, so that it becometh forthwith to be whole Christ, both body and soul, and his divinity too into the bargain, as they say it doth; mark what most monstrous paradoxes and absurdities will ensue upon it. For first, we have a new Divinity of a Creatures making; and secondly, our Saviour Christ must have as many natural bodies, as all the Priests in Christendom say several Masses, which is to make him far more monstrous than the Giant Geryon, and not to have three bodies only, but three hundred thousand. Or else this natural body of Christ must be entire and whole both in heaven and earth, and on the earth in as many several places at the self same time, as there are daily Masses said in the Church of Rome; which is to take away the Properties of a body natural. For tolle spatia locorum corporibus & nusquam erunt, & si nusquam erunt, nec erunt ipsa 
(y) Aug. Epist. ad Dardanum. , as St. Augustine hath it: Take away from a body limitation of place, and it will be no where; and if no where, than it is no body. And next we shall have bodies made of flesh and blood, and bones and sinews, and all things requisite to the being of a natural body, which yet is neither high nor low, nor thick nor thin, nor broad nor narrow, not visible unto the eye, nor perceptible unto any other of the senses: which is to feign a body without all dimensions, which never any body was supposed to be; and make it neither subject unto sight nor touch, though Christ was subject unto both, and evidenced to be so in St. Thomas his case. Add next, that this most glorious body made of flesh and blood, endued with a reasonable soul, and having a Divinity superadded to it, must be devoured, and eaten, and perhaps worse used: which is to make all Christians to be Anthropophagis, yea and worse than so; not to be man-eaters only, but God-eaters too. And last of all, for this conversion of the bread into the very body of Christ, the same which was once born of the Virgin Mary, they know not what to call it, nor on what to ground it. A total conversion they would have it 
(a) Bell. de Euchar. l. 3. c. 18. , and yet the taste and colour of the bread doth remain as formerly; a substantial conversion it must also be, and yet it is sine sui mutatione 
(b) Bonavent. cited by Bell. , without a change at all, saith Bonaventure. Such a conversion 'tis, that they know no name for it; for it is neither productiva nor conservativa, as Bellarmine himself confesseth. And therefore he is fain to devise a name and call it conversio adductiva; (a notion which neither Divinity nor Philosophy ever knew before) and hath been quarrelled since by the Pontificians, as himself confesseth in the book of his Recognitions. And as they knew not how to call it, so neither can they tell upon what to ground it. Suares affirmeth as before, that it depends ex Mathematicis & Philosophicis Principiis 
(c) Suares in 3. Thomae didst 50. , on Philosophical and Mathematical principles; and then, as the Archb. of Spalleto said in defence thereof, it may be an error in Philosophy, but not in Divinity. The most part ground it only on the Church's authority, by which it was determined in the Council of Lateran; and yet both Scotus 
(d) Scotus in Scrip. Oxon. 4.  and Durandus 
(e) Durand l. 4. d. 12. qu. 1. , two learned Papists, condemn the Church of unadvisedness for so defining it, by reason of those inextricable plunges and perplexities which it puts them to. Some would fain ●ound it in the Scriptures, and have tugged hard for it: but after all their pains they are told by Cajetan, that there is nothing in the Gospel to make good the matter. Their best way were to let our Saviour be in heaven at the right hand of God, and not to bring him down by their new devices. Of which his sitting at the right hand of God I am next to speak, having thus cleared my way unto it by this Dissertation.    

ARTICULI 7. Pars 2da. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Sedet ad dextram Dei, Patris Omnipotentis. i e. And sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty.  

CHAP. XII. Of sitting at the right hand of God; the proper meaning of the phrase; and of the Privileges which accrue thereby to our Lord and Saviour.  
THey which consider our Redeemer in his several Offices do look upon him as a King, a Priest, and a Prophet; A Priest to offer prayers and sacrifices for the sins of his people, a Prophet to instruct them in the ways of righteousness, a King to govern and direct them by the rules of justice. And unto every one of these, they do design some branch or Article of the Creed, in which it either is expressed, or else may easily be fitted and reduced unto it. That of his Priesthood they refer wholly to this last branch of the present Article, the sitting of our Saviour at the right hand of God: where he maketh intercession for us 
(a) Rom. 8.34. , which is the most proper duty of the Priestly function. That of the Kingly Office they refer partly unto this, but chiefly to the Article following, where he is represented as the Judge both of quick and dead. But first before we come to that, we must inquire into the meaning of the phrase or form of speech, Sedere ad dextram Dei, this sitting at the right hand of God; then show how this is verified in Christ our Saviour. Which done, we will consider the effects and benefits which do redound unto us men by that great advancement which Christ hath merited or acquired in our humane nature. And first, this phrase or form of speech, viz. the sitting on the right hand of God the Father Almighty, is borrowed from the guise of great Kings and Potentates, amongst whom it is an usual thing, to place the man whom they intent to honour in the sight of the people, at their own right hand. So did King Solomon with his Mother in the Book of the Kings, when she came to him as a suitor in behalf of Adonijah 
(b) 1 King. 2.19. . Whom when the King saw, he rose up to meet her, saith the Text, and bowed himself unto her, sat down on his Throne, and caused a seat to be set for the King's Mother, and she sat at his right hand. A greater honour to a subject, (for a Queen Mother is no more by the law of Nations) the King could not do her: and he made known by this unto all his people, that he would have his Mother honoured in the next place to himself. So read we in the Book of Psalms, upon thy right hand did stand the Queen in gold of Ophir 
(c) Psal. 45.9. ; Which whether it were meant of David's own, or Solomon's wi●e, shows plainly that she was to be accounted of as the second person in the Kingdom, next in degree and honour to the King himself. Of which St. Hierom giveth this reason, Est enim Regina regnatque cum eo 
(d) Hieronym. ad Princip. Virg. Tom. 3. , because she was the Queen, and in her conjugal right reigned together with him. And this appears yet further by the suit or motion, which the mother of Zebedees' children made in behalf of her sons; when she came unto him, saying, Grant me that these my two sons might sit, the one on thy right hand, and the other on thy left in thy Kingdom 
(e) Mat. 20.21. . The good woman (as it seems) conceived, as generally the Apostles and Disciples did, that Christ should be invested one day with the Crown of Israel; and she desired to have her sons advanced to the highest places of trust and reputation about their Master. She did not doubt, but they should be of good esteem with him upon all occasions. Our Saviour Christ had as it were, assured them of that before, when he took them and Peter out of all the rest, to be present at the miracle of his Transfiguration 
(f) Mat. 17.1. , and the raising of the Ruler's daughter 
(g) Luk. 8.51. . That which she aimed at, was of an higher nature, ut ipsi primi essent, & caeteros omnes praeirent in regno ipsius 
(h) Estius in ; to have them made the chief, above all the rest; the one to hold the first, and the other the second place about him. That was her meaning, in the placing of them, the one at his right hand, and the other on his left, when he came to his Kingdom. Sedere ad dextram alicujus, est proximam ab eo dignitatem; sedere autem ad sinistram, secundum dignitatis locum obtinere, as Estius states it very rightly. So that by sitting at the right hand in the holy Scriptures, we are to understand the next place of power and dignity, to him upon whose right hand they are said to sit; and intimates the same or the like authority as Pharaoh gave to joseph in the Book of Genesis 
(i) Gen. 41.43. , when he made him ride in the second Chariot that he had, constituted him the Ruler of all the land of Egypt. But then this sitting at the right hand, is to be understood, as before I said, of sitting at the right hand of great Princes only: for it is otherwise with men of inferior quality, and that according to the custom of several Countries. For anciently amongst the Romans, when two only me● or sat together, the more unworthy person sat or stood on the right hand of the other, as Antonius Nebrissensis very well observeth. The reason, as I take it was, because that in the rites of Augury, the flying or appearing of the birds of divination on the left hand, did signify good luck and prosperous success in their intendments. Hence that of Tully, A sinistra cornice ratum & firmum Augurium fieri 
(k) Cicero de divinat. l. 1. ; and that of the twelve Tables to the same effect, Ave sinistra populi Magister est●. And 'tis the custom at this day in some parts of Italy, for the more worthy person to go on the left hand of the other, because thereby he is made master of the other man's sword. But if there were more than two in company, the best man always used to place himself in the midst; that he might seem to be protected on all sides from the hands of his enemies. And this Minutius witnesseth in his elegant Dialogue, where seating himself in the midst betwixt Octavius and Cecilius, he said he did it to this end, (as the use than was) ut me ex tribus medium ambitione lateris protegerent 
(l) Minut. Felix. in Octavio. . So Sallust telleth us of Hiempsal, that he placed himself on the right hand of Adherbal, Ne medius ex tribus, quod & apud Numidas honori ducitur, Jugurtha foret 
(m) Sallust de bello jugurthino. ; because he would not leave Jugurth in the middle place, which in that Country was esteemed for the highest honour.  
But leaving other Countries, and inferior persons to their own customs and conditions, certain it is, that it was otherwise with great Princes, and amongst the jews: in whose esteem the right hand was the better and more worthy place: the sitting at the right hand of a Prince or Potentate, accounted for the greatest favour. How much an higher honour and a greater favour must it then be thought to sit on the right hand of God the Father Almighty, the King of Kings, and Lord of Lords, from whom all Princes of the earth had received their Sceptres? Which honour that we may the better estimate, and put no less a value than it ought to have; we will consider in the next place what is meant by the Right hand of God; and then proceed unto the honour done to our Lord and Saviour, in his advancement to a place so great and glorious. And first I take it for a thing granted by all Orthodox Christians, that the word is not to be taken literally, that God hath any hands either right or left. That were to fall into the Heresy of the Anthropomorphites 
(n) Prateol. de haeres. , who because they found it written in the book of Genesis, that God made man after his own Image, would needs make God to be after the image of man; and gave him hands, and mouth, and eyes, and all other members. But therein of the two, the Heathen was the better Christian, who told us, 
(o) Cicero de nature. dear.  ad divinam imaginem propius accedere humanam virtutem quam figuram; that men resembled the Divine Image of God more than in their virtues then their making, more in the endowments of the mind, then in the structure of their bodies. So that as often as we meet with such expressions in the Book of God, we must conceive that God doth frame his speech unto our capacities, and speaketh unto us after the manner of men; that so we may the easier apprehend his meaning. Which being premised once for all, the right hand of God will be found to signify either his power and dignity, or his love and goodness. That the right hand is the hand of strength, will I think be granted. And that it is the hand of love, besides the ordinary form of salutation, by taking and giving the right hand with those whom we affect most cordially; is evident in holy Scripture. For in the Old Testament the Patriarch jacob called that son whom he loved most tenderly, by the name of Benjamin, that is the son of his right hand 
(p) Gen. 35.18. . And the same jacob, when he intended to bestow the more excellent blessing on Ephraim, joseph youngest son, he laid his right hand upon his head, and his left hand on the head of Manasseh, which was the elder 
(q) Gen. 48.14, 19 . And this he did wittingly, saith the Text, to signify, that though Manasseh should become a great people, yet that his younger brother should be greater than he. Thus also in the New Testament, we meet with dextra societatis 
(r) Gal. 2.9. , the right hand of fellowship, which the three chief Apostles gave to Paul and Barnabas. Which whether it was to testify by that outward sign the mutual correspondency and good consent which was between them; or to establish the agreement then at that time made, that Paul and Barnabas should preach the Gospel to the Heathen, and the others unto those of the Circumcision; is not much material: though possibly it might be in both respects; for the right hand was anciently aswell the pledge of truth and fidelity, as of love and friendship: the joining of the right hands in the making of Leagues, (jungamus foedera dextra, as one Poet, & data dextera quondam, as another hath it) being of ordinary use amongst most Nations. To bring this home unto our purpose, the right hand being of itself and of common usage, the hand of power and love, the hand of friendship and fidelity; it followeth that by the right hand of Almighty God, we must mean some or all of these, either his mighty power, or his eminent goodness, or his fidelity in performing of his word and promises. That the right hand of God is used to denote his power, is evident by many several passages in the Royal Psalmist; The right hand of the Loud, saith he, hath the pre-eminence, the right hand of the Lord bringeth mighty things to pass 
(s) Psal. 118. 1●. : And in another of the Psalms, With his own right hand and with his holy arm, hath he gotten to himself the victory. Assuredly those victories and great acts he speaks of, were all of them acheived by the power of God; the right hand of the power of God, as our Saviour calleth it, Luke 22.69. And as the right hand is applied to God as the hand of power, by which he ruleth all things both in heaven and earth, so is it sometimes also ascribed unto him, (and not to him alone, but to Christ nor Saviour, as the hand of love, by which he cherisheth and protecteth his faithful servants. For what else is the reason why the sheep in the day of Judgement shall be placed at the right hand 
(t) Mat. 25.33.  of the King of Heaven, but to show that they are his beloved ones, his Benjamins, the children of his right hand (as that name doth signify)? And for what reason is it said, that he doth embrace the Church his Spouse with his right hand 
(u) Cant. 2.6. , but to show that ardour and sincerity of affection wherewith he doth cherish and protect her? Cant. 2.6. & 8.3. Be it the power of God, or his fidelity and love, it's the right hand st●ll.  
There is another word to be looked on yet, before we shall find out the full meaning of this branch of the Article▪ which is the word S●det, which we render sitting. In which we must not understand, as I think some Protestant Writers do, any constant posture of the Body of Christ, at the right hand of God. For he who in the Creed, and in divers places of the Old and New Testament, is said to sit at the right hand of God the Father Almighty, is by St. Stephen, who saw him with a glorified eye, affirmed to stand. Behold (saith he) I see heaven opened, and the Son of man standing 
(a) Act. 7.56.  at the right hand. Sitting and standing then, for both words are used, denote not to us any certain posture of our Saviour's body; but serve to signify that rest and quiet, which he hath found in Heaven after all his labours. For what was our most blessed Saviour in the whole course and passages of his life and death but a man of troubles; transported from one Country to another in his very infancy, and from one City to another when he preached the Gospel: compelled to convey himself away from the sight of men to save his life; exposed to scoffs and scorns at the hour of his death? Noah's Dove and he were both alike. No rest for either to be found on the face of the earth; no ease till they were taken into the Ark again, out of which they were sent. And this St. Paul doth intimate, where he tells us of him, that for the joy which was set before him he endured the Cross, and despised the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the Throne of God 
(b) Heb. 12.2. ; And unto this construction of the word Sedere, St. Ambrose very well agrees, saying, Secundum consuetudinem nostram illi consessus offertur, qui aliquo opere perfecto victor adveniens, honoris gratia promeretur ut sedeat 
(c) Ambr. Serm. 60. . It is, saith he, our usual custom, to offer a chair or seat to him, who having perfected the work which he had in hand, doth deserve to sit. And on this ground the man CHRIST JESUS having by his death and passion overcome the Devil, and by his Resurrection broken open the gates of Hell, having accomplished his work, and returning unto Heaven a Conqueror, was placed by God the Father at his own right hand. Thus far and to this purpose he. The like may be affirmed of standing, or of standing still, which doubtless is a great refreshment to a wearied Traveller, a breathing bait, as commonly we use to call it; and many times is used in Scripture for a posture of ease, as Quid statis toto die otiosi 
(d) Mat. 20.6. ? Why stand you here all the day idle? But to proceed a little further in this disquisition, there may be more found in the words then so. For standing is the posture of a General or man of action, ready to fall on upon the Enemy, Oportet Imperatorem stantem mori 
(e) Dion. in Vespasiano. , said the Roman Emperor. And it is also the posture which the jews used in prayer, as appears Matth. 6.5 Luk. 18.10.13. From whence they took that usual saying, Sine stationibus non subsisteret mundus, that were it not for such stand, the world would not stand. And sitting is, we know, the posture of a Judge or Magistrate in the act of judicature; of Princes, keeping state in the Throne Imperial. And this appears as plainly by our Saviour's words to his Apostles, saying that they which followed him in the Regeneration, should when the Son of man did sit in the Throne of his glory, sit upon twelve Thrones judging the twelve Tribes of Israel 
(f) Mat. 19.28. . And so the word is also used in Heathen Authors; as, Consedere deuces, cons●ssique ora tenebant, in the Poet Ovid 
(g) Ovid. Meta. l. 13. , when the great cause was to be tried for Achilles' armour. When therefore St. Stephen beheld our Saviour Christ, and saw him standing at the right hand of God the Father; he found him either ready as a Chief or General, to lead on against the enemies of his persecuted and afflicted Church; or as an Advocate, (Habemus enim Advocatum; for we have an Advocate with the Father, 
(h) 1 Joh. 2.1.  JESUS CHRIST the righteous) pleading before God's Throne in behalf thereof, or offering up his prayers for the sins of his people. And when St. Paul and other texts of holy Scripture do describe him sitting, they look upon him in the nature of a judge or Magistrate; the Supreme Governor of the Church: and then sedere is as much as regnare, 
(i) Hieronyn. in Ephes. 1.  as St. Hierome hath it, to reign or rule. And to this last St. Paul doth seem to give some countenance, if we compare his words with those of the Royal Psalmist. Sat thou at my right hand, saith the Psalmist, till I have made thy enemies thy footstool, Psal. 110.1. Oportet eum regnare saith the Apostle, For he must reign (or it behoveth him to reign), till he hath put all enemies under his feet, 1 Cor. 15.25. Of this mind also was Sedulius an old Christian Poet 
(i) Sedul. Carm. l. 5. .  

Aethereas evectus abit sublimis in auras,  
Et dextram subit ipse Patris, mundumque gubernat.   

Ascending into Heaven, at God's right hand  
He sits, and all the World doth there command.   
This said, we will descend to those Expositions, which have been made by several men on this branch of the Article; and after pitch on that which we think most likely: Some think this sitting at the right hand of God to signify the fame with that which was said before of his ascending into Heaven; which opinion Vrsin doth both recite, and reject. And he rejects it as I conceive upon very good reason; it being very absurd, as lie truly noteth, in tam brevi Symbolo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 committi 
(k) Vrsin in Caetech. praet. 2. , that a tautology should be used in so short a summary. It had been very absurd indeed, and yet more absurd, if they should intimate the same thing in a figurative and metaphorical form of speech, which they had formerly expressed in so plain a way as was familiar to the apprehension of the weakest Christians. Others and those the greater part both of the Protestant Churches, and the Church of Rome, do so expound Christ's sitting at the right hand of God, as if thereby he were made equal to the Father in Majesty, and power, and glory. And this way many of the Ancients have gone before them. But 
(l) Maldonat. in Marc. 16.  Maldonat not content with this, goes a strain yet higher, a stra●t above Elah at the least, and thinks that CHRIST by sitting at the right hand of God, is somewhat more than equal to him, Et majorem prae se dignitatem ferat, and carrieth a resemblance of the greater dignity, as being placed in the more honourable and more worthy seat: For this he giveth us a rule and an instance too, both alike, false and faulty, if examined throughly. His rule is this, Cum sedent duo, qui honoratior est sedet ad dextram; that when two persons sit together, the most worthy of them sits on the right hand of the other. But this is only true amongst private persons, and that but in some Countries, and at some times neither. Between a King and Subjects of what rank soever, the case is otherwise; and most ridiculous and absurd would the consequents be, if it were not so: Next let us look upon the instance which he gives us of it out of his abundance, to see if it doth either mend or mar the matter; and we shall find both that and his inference on it, to be more ridiculous than his rule. His instance is that of Bathsheba before remembered, whom Solomon, saith he, did place on the right hand of his Throne, ut eam superiorem agnosceret, thereby acknowledging his Mother to be his superior. Assuredly the jesuit must be very blind when he made that inference, and did not see how ill it did cohere with the truth of story; or else he must be thought to have a further aim in it then he would be know of. All that can logically be deduced from that act of solomon's, is that he bore a filial duty to his Mother, though he were her Sovereign; and did desire to have her honoured by his people in the next place to himself. For had she been Superior to him, or so thought herself, she would not have petitioned him 
(m) 1 King. 2.21. , as we see she did, to bestow Abishag the Shunamite upon Adonijah; but would have done it freely of her own authority. Or had the King conceived her to be Lady Paramount, and to have the Sovereignty or Superiority, as the jesuit saith; he would not have returned her back with a flat denial, especially considering that she had descended so much beneath herself as to move him in it, and that too in an humble and petitioning way. Qui Rex est, Regem maxim non habeat, said the Poet Marshal, if Bathsheba was Supreme unto Solomon, and confessed to be so; then was he no King. Or if we grant it to be so in the case of Bathsheba, we must allow it to be so too in the King's wife, Psal. 45. placed at the King's right hand by David 
(m) Psal. 45.9. , in a very ill time. For whether we understand it literal●y of the King's wife, the Queen, whose wife soever she was, whether his or Solomon's; or mystically of the Church, the Spouse of Christ: it must needs follow by his rule and his reason both, that the Queen wore the breeches, and did rule the King, and the CHURCH Lord it over CHRIST; neither of which I think the learned jesuit had the face to say. And therefore I am easily induced to think that Maldonate being a man of great reach and reading, had a further aim in it; and laid his line a far off for some other fish. For Solomon being, as he was, a Type of Christ, and though a King, yet publicly acknowledging his Mother for Superior to him: why may not then the Virgin Mary take the like authority, why must not Christ submit to her as to his Supreme? If so, then jure Matris impera Redemptori 
(n) Cited by B. jewel in the defence of his Apology. , will be no longer Popish superstition, but good Christian piety; and Bonaventures Psalter a new piece of Scripture: then the dividing of the Kingdom of God betwixt Christ and his Mother, leaving to him the King's Bench 
(o) Gab. Biel. de Canone Missae. , and to her the Chancery, justice to him, but mercy to his Lady Mother; will be sound Divinity; and the Idolatrous title of Regina Coeli 
(p) In Ritual. & Officiis B. Virg. , or the Queen of Heaven, which they so often give her in their public formulas, will be no longer Courtship, (or a spiritual kind of dalliance, as Harding 
(q) Defence of the Apology. cap. 18. §. 1.  calls it,) but her own just right. Nay God must be beholding to her if she stop at that, and put not in for the Supremacy over him and all, as by the Jesuits grounds she may, for aught I can see. For since that Christ by sitting at the right hand of God the Father, hath not only an equality with him both in power and Majesty, but majus quiddam saith the jesuit, something more excellent than so: and seeing that the Virgin Maries case is like that of Bathsheba, (and 'tis a ruled case, that of Bathsheba, if we mark it well): it must needs follow thereupon, for aught I can judge, that God the Father must content himself with the third place only, and be glad of that too. Adeo argumenta ex absurdo petita ineptos habent exitus, said Lactantius truly.  
Let us consider in the next place, whether this sitting of our Saviour at the right hand of God, doth give him an equality with God the Father, which is the more received opinion, and more likely far: or if not that, than what our Saviour gains by his sitting there, and what we take to be the meaning of that form of speech. And first, I see no reason strong enough to persuade me to it, that sitting at the right hand is a sign of equality, the case being rightly laid, as it ought to be, betwixt a King and his Subjects, betwixt God and man. For I conceive this Article to relate only to the man CHRIST JESUS; and that the note of Estius is exceeding good, that is to say, that all the Articles of the Creed concerning Christ, from his being conceived by the holy Ghost, to that of his coming unto judgement inclusively, de Christo dici secundum humanam naturam 
(r) Estius in Mar. 16. , are spoken of him only in his humane nature. For in that only he was born of the Virgin Mary, in that alone did he suffer under Pontius Pilate, in that was crucified, dead and buried, descended into hell, rose again from the dead; and finally in that, and in none but that, did he ascend into the Heavens, and there doth sit at the right hand of God the Father Almighty. And if his humane nature in itself considered, will not give him an equality with God the Father, as he himself affirms it did not, acknowledging that his Father was greater than he 
(s) Joh. 14.28. , and that he knew not all things which the Father did 
(t) Mar. 13.32. : then certainly this his sitting at the right hand of God will not do it for him. For building on the grounds which before we laid, though sitting at the right hand of a Prince or Potentate, were a great honour to the man that sat there, and gave him the next place to the Prince himself: yet that it gave him an equality of power and Majesty, neither the nature of Sovereignty which can brook no equals, nor any of the instances before remembered, can evince or evidence. Not that of David and his Queen if of her, he means it, for David was too well acquainted with his own authority, as to divide it with his wife, and become joint Tenant with her to the Crown of Israel. Nor that of Solomon and his Mother, which the jesuit stands on, for then the King had done her wrong to reject her suit; and more than so, to put his brother to the sword, for whom and in whose cause she came a suitor. Though Solomon was then very young, and as much indebted to Bathsheba for the Crown of Israel, as a son could be unto a Mother: yet he knew how to keep his distance, and preserve his power. Young Princes have their jealousies in point of State, aswell as those of riper years, and can as ill endure or admit a Rival. Omnisque potestas impatiens 
(u) Lucan. Phars. l. 1.  consoriis erit, as the Poet hath it. Their hearts are equally made up of Caesar and Pompey, as unable to endure an equal, as admit a Superior. Though Nero was advanced to the Empire of Rome by the power and practices of Agrippina his Mother; and came as young unto the Crown as King Solomon did: yet would he not permit her to be partner with him, no not so much as in the outward signs and pomps of Majesty. And therefore when he saw her come into the Senate, with an intent to sit down with him, as he thought, in the Throne Imperial; he cunningly rose up to meet her: Atque ita specie pietatis obviam itum est dedecori 
(x) Tacit. Annal. lib. 13. , saith the wise Historian, and under pretence of doing his duty to her, did prevent the infamy. So then, the sitting of our Saviour at the right hand of God, importing neither an equality with him, nor any superiority at all above him; the phrase being measured, as it ought, according to the standard of the jewish Idiom, and the received customs of that Nation: we must inquire a little further to find out the meaning.  
Most like it is, that by these words, And sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty, is meant the exaltation of the man CHRIST JESUS, our blessed Lord and Saviour in his humane nature, to the next degree of power and glory unto God himself; whereby he was made Lord and Christ 
(y) Act. 2.36. , the Prince and Saviour 
(z) Eph. 1.22.  of his people, as St. Peter calls him, the head over all things unto his Church, as St. Paul entitles him: that to enable him the better to discharge those Offices wherewith by God he is entrusted, he hath received withal a participation of God's Almighty power and most infinite goodness, for the defence and preservation of the Church committed to him, with all those other powers and faculties, which are in Scripture called the right hand of God; and finally, that sitting there in rest and quiet after all his labours, he is continually intent on his Church's safety, which he stands ready to defend against all its enemies, to govern a●d direct it in the ways of godliness, and to reward or punish as he sees occasion. Which exaltation of our Saviour in his humane nature, I can no better liken then to that of joseph, when Pharaoh made him Ruler over all the land of Egypt 
(a) Gen. 41.40, 41. , and placed him also over his house, that according to his word they might all be ruled; and made him to ride in the second Chariot that he had, with an Officer to cry before him, Bow the knee 
(b) Ibid. v. 43. . All he reserved unto himself was the Regal Throne in which he could not brook an equal; Only in the Throne, said he, will I be greater than thou 
(e) Vers. 40. . So stands the case, as I conceive it, between God the Father and his Christ. Christ by his exaltation to the right hand of God, hath gained the nearest place both of power and glory unto God himself; a participation of God's divine power and goodness, an absolute command over all the Church consisting both of men and Angels. Only the Divine Throne, the Supreme transcendency, the Lord God Almighty reserves unto himself, not to part with that. And if we look into the Scriptures with a careful eye, we shall find Christ standing near the Throne of Almighty God; but not sitting on it. St. Paul informs us to that purpose, where he saith of Christ, that he sat down at the right hand of the Throne of God 
(d) Heb. 12.2. . And St. john telleth us in the Book of the Revelation, that he saw in the right hand of him that sat upon the Throne (which was God the Father) a Book written within, and on the backside 
(e) Apoc. 5.1, 6, 7. ; And the Lamb which had been slain came and took the Book out of the right hand of him that sat on the Throne: A matter which the strongest Angel mentioned in the second verse, did not dare to meddle with; knowing his distance from the Throne, and how ill it became him to attempt too near it. For though the Angels of themselves are of a more excellent & glorious nature, and far surpassing all the children of the loins of Adam: yet in this point they fall short of those infinite glories, which CHRIST acquired in his person to our humane Nature. First, in his birth, God did in no wise take the Angels 
(f) Heb. 2.16. , saith the great Apostle, but the seed of Abraham he took: the meaning is, that when God was to send a Saviour to redeem the world, and that both men and Angels stood, at once, before him; both coveting to be advanced to so high a dignity: he did confer that honour on the seed of Abraham, on one descended from his loins, and not on any of the Angels of what rank soever. Who being born into the world was honoured presently with the name of the Son of God, the first begotten Son of the Lord most high: and therein was much better and more excellent than the Angels were, in that he did inherit a more excellent name 
(g) Ibid. 1.45. . That's the first point in which our Saviour had the better of those glorious creatures. For unto which of the Angels, (that is to say, none at all) said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? Though he was made lower than the Angels, of inferior metal, and for a while of less esteem in the eyes of men: yet did they worship him at his birth, by Gods own command, and cheerfully proclaimed the news to the sons of men. Now as God honoured him with a name above all the Angels, so he advanced him to a place at his own right hand, which never any of the Angels was thought worthy of. For unto which of the Angels said he at any time 
(h) Ibid. v. 13. , Sat thou on my right hand until I make thine enemies thy footstool. But this man being the brightness of the glory, and the very Image of the substance of God, upholding all things with the Word of his power, and having by himself purged away our sins, hath sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high 
(i) Ibid. v. 3. , saith the same Apostle. And this is that which the same Apostle meaneth in another place, saying, that God hath set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, far above all principalities and powers, and might and dominion, and every name that is named 
(k) Ephes. 1.21. . Where plainly he relates to the holy Angels, whom he distinguisheth there, as elsewhere 
(l) Col. 1.16. , by their several Orders: but makes all subject and subordinate to the Son of man. Nor hath he only the advantage of those blessed spirits in place and title, and no more; but also the greatness of that power and authority, which sitting at the right hand doth present unto us. He doth not only sit there, and no more but so, but sits there, till his enemies be made his footstool, as before was said: all things what ever being put in subjection under his feet 
(m) Heb. 2.8. . Which as it is one of the effects or consequents of sitting at the right hand of God the Father Almighty; so is it such an height of honour, such a point of Sovereignty, as never any of the Angels could attain unto. For unto the Angels, saith St. Paul, hath he not put in subjection the world to come 
(n) Ibid. v. 5.7. , nor made them to have dominion over the works of his hands. And all this is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, no, not in any wise, not at any hand. These privileges and preeminences are for none but Christ, reserved for him from the beginning before the foundations of the world were laid.  
These than are the Preeminences and Prerogatives Royal, which Christ our Saviour doth enjoy above Angels and Men, at the right hand of God the Father; where he sits crowned with honour and eternal glory. And why this sitting at the right hand of God, may not be taken in the literal and Grammatical sense, according to the plain meaning of the words without tropes and figures; and all these several Preeminences and Prerogatives Royal, for the effects or consequents of his exaltation: I must confess I know no reason to convince me. Some things there are which very much incline me to be so persuaded, which I shall briefly offer unto consideration, and offer them no otherwise then considerations; and so leave them there. First, I consider with myself, and desire all learned men and Orthodox believers to consider with me; why all the other Articles of the Christian faith, even that of the descent into Hell, as before was proved 
(o) See chap 8. of this second part. , should be delivered in plain words, and generally received in all times and Ages according to the literal sense; this only, being of such moment for our Consolation, should be wrapped up in Tropes and figures, and have another meaning then the words import: or why the Apostles, when they made this Creed to be the summary or abstract of the Christian faith, and therefore to be fitted to the capacity of the weakest Christians, who must be fed with milk 
(p) 1 Pet. 2.1. , as St. Peter tells us, (and he was one of those that composed this Symbol) should use a phrase of such a dark and doubtful interpretation, as doth distract the greatest Clerks to find out the meaning. Assuredly they had but ill provided for the vulgar Christian, who must be fed with milk, and not with stronger meats 
(q) Heb. 5.13, 14. , as St. Paul adviseth, should they have set before them meats of hard digestion, and feasted them with figurative, and Metaphorical speeches, which none of them did understand, or could hope to do it. In which respect, I am not of the Doctor's mind, though I much reverence the man for his parts and learning, who telleth us 
(r) Dr. jackson, on the Creed, part. 9 cap. 39 , that we are bound to believe distinctly and explicitly, all other Articles of the Creed concerning Christ according the plain literal and Grammatical sense of the words, wherein the Evangelists and Apostles have expressed them, without the vail of any Rhetorical Trope or Allegory: but for the place whither he Ascended, and for the manner of his sitting at the right hand of God, these cannot so distinctly he conceived by us, because they are not in such proper terms expressed by the holy Ghost, but are wrapped up in a vail of Legal shadows and Representations. I say, I cannot be in this of that Doctor's judgement, because me thinks the reason which he giveth to confirm his opinion, doth incline me very strongly to the contrary: For if our belief or knowledge of the other Articles, be literally required (as he saith it is) seeing the matter contained in them is sensible and comprehensible to reason sanctified by Grace: I cannot see, but that his sitting at the right hand of God, in the literal sense, may be as sensible and comprehensible to a sanctified reason, as his Conception by the power of the holy Ghost, or being born into the World of the Virgin Mary. To make this probable and comprehensible, I shall consider in the next place, that though Almighty God in his own Divine Nature be infinite, immensurable, and incomprehensible, not circumscribed in any place, or confined unto it; but equally in all places by his Omnipresence, according to that of the Prophet jeremy 
(m) Jer. 23.24. . Do not I fill Heaven and Earth, saith the Lord Almighty? Yet we are to behold him in another notion, when we speak of our Redeemers sitting at the right hand of God, though we abstract him not from that Omnipresence, nor that from him. For look on God in his infinite nature, equally present in all places, and contained in none; and then place CHRIST. our Saviour upon God's right hand: it must needs follow thereupon, that Christ's natural body, in which he sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty, must have a local being in all places also, which is a thing not possible to a Body natural. And what can follow after that, but that we either fall into the error of the Vbiquitarians who under colour of the personal union, and communication of the properties of either nature in CHRIST, have utterly destroyed the being of his natural body, by making it present in all places by an Omnipresence: or salve it by a miracle as the Papists do, in giving him a multipresence, (a thing as utterly inconsistent with a body natural) making him to be present in as many places at once, as all the Popish Priests in the world can say several Masses. And therefore I consider in the third place, that though God the Lord be present in all places at once; If I climb up into heaven thou art there, if I go down into Hell thou art there also, as the Psalmist hath it 
(t) Psal. 1. 3●.9. : yet take him in perfecta gloriae suae exhibitione, in the full and perfect manifestation of of his glorious Majesty, and then he may be said most truly, to have his habitation in the Heaven of Heavens. For thus the Prophet Moses in the Book of Deuteronomie, Look down from Heaven thy holy habitation; 26.15. Thus David in the Psalms, The Lord's seat is on high, from the place of his dwelling he beholdeth all things, Psal. 112. Thus Solomon the Son of David, Hear thou from Heaven thy dwelling place, 1 King. chap. 8. Finally thus the Prophet Isaiah, Look down from Heaven, the habitation of thine happiness and of thy glory, Chap. 63. He is no Christian, I dare say, who will stick at this▪ And this b●ing granted, I consider, that in a place of such immensity as the Heaven of Heavens, in a large house wherein there are so many Mansions, as our Saviour telleth us, the Lord hath chosen one place above all the rest in which to fix his Throne, and advance his Sceptre; and show himself in all the Majesty of his Glory to the Saints and Angels. For as the Lord was present in all parts of the Temple, but most effectually in the Sanctum Sanctorum, where the Ark was kept, and into which none entered but the High Priest only was thought fit to enter: so though his dwelling be in Heaven, in all parts thereof, all which may properly be called his Court or Imperial Palace: yet hath he placed his Throne in that part of Heaven, which the Apostle by allusion calleth the Holy of Holies 
(u) Heb. 9.12. , where the Ark of his incomprehensible Majesty is most conspicuous to be seen; and into which none but our High Priest JESUS CHRIST was permitted to enter. Of all the Apostles only two were so highly favoured as to be carried in the Spirit into Heaven above, where they not only heard 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, such things as are impossible for a man to utter 
(x) 2 Cor. 12.4. , though he could speak with all the tongues both of men and Angels; but saw 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 even the invisible things of God 
(y) Rome 1 20. , which never mortal man had beheld before: and both of them describe God sitting on a Throne. St. john most copiously thus, 
(z) Apoc. 4.2.  Immediately (saith he) I was in the Spirit, and behold a Throne was set in Heaven, and one sat on the Throne, Ver. 2. About the Throne were four and twenty seats for the four and twenty Elders, vers. 4. and out of it proceeded Lightnings, and Thunderings, and Voices, vers. 5. And when the time came and the Q. was given, the four and twenty Elders fell down before him that sat on the Throne, and worshipped, and cast their Crowns before the Throne, saying, Thou art worthy O Lord our God to receive glory, and honour, and power, because thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure sake they are and were created, vers. 10, 11. more to this purpose doth occur in the following Chapter. And last of all I do consider, that though the Throne Imperial of Almighty God, hath neither a right side or a left, as indeed it hath not: yet seeing that our Saviour is ascended in his natural body, and hath his left hand and his right hand, like to other bodies: it will be logically inferred, that our Redeemer sitting by the Throne of God with his left hand next unto the Throne, in true propriety of speech without Trope or figure, may be said to sit at the right hand of God, or on the right hand of the Throne of God, which comes all to one. St. Paul who had been rapt up into the third Heaven 
(a) 2 Cor. 12.2. , and had a glimpse at least, if not a full and perfect sight of the heavenly glories, hath it so expressly: where he affirms that our Redeemer, the Author and finisher of our faith, having endured the Cross and despised the shame, is set down on the right hand of the Throne of God 
(b) Heb. 12.2. & 8.1. . And St. john intimates as much when he tells us, as it were, from the mouth of Christ, in these very words, To him that overcometh, I will grant to sit with me in my Throne, 
(c) Apoc. 3.21.  even as I overcame and have sitten with my Father in his Throne. Where plainly Christ our Saviour sitting in the same Throne wi●h Almighty God, as St. john expressly saith he doth; may properly be said to sit at the right hand of God, in regard that the left hand of his natural body was in site nearest to the splendour of his heavenly Majesty; for otherwise God must be said to sit on the right hand of Christ. The like may be affirmed of St. Stephen also, where it is said, that being full of the holy Ghost, that is to say, transported from himself by the holy Spirit, he looked steadfastly into Heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God 
(d) Act 7.55. . In which we have the glory of God conspicuously manifested in his Royal Throne, and jesus standing at the right hand of the Throne, or at the right hand of God, take which phrase you will: and standing either as an Advocate to plead for his afflicted servants, or as a suitor in behalf of the Proto-martyr; or as General in chief, ready to march against the enemies of his best beloved. So far we may consider of the literal sense of this branch of the Article, without any derogation ●rom the Majesty of God the Father; and much unto the honour of our Lord and Saviour; and without any prejudice unto faith and piety. And in such Cases, as I take it, the best way is to stand to this good old Rule, that where the literal sense of holy Scripture doth hold an analogy, and correspondence with the Rule of Faith, it is to be preferred before any other.  
But whether this be so, or not (for I propose it only as a consideration) I have delivered freely my opinion in it; and have delivered it no otherwise then as my opinion, to which I never was so wedded, but that a clearer judgement might at any time divorce me from it. My opinions as they are but opinions, so they are but mine. As mine, I have no reason to impose them upon other men, or seek to captivate their understanding, and make it subject to my sense. And as opinions, I am not bound to adhere to them myself, but lawfully may change and vary, according to that light and evidence of holy truth, which either shall or may be given unto me. In matters doctrinal, concluded and delivered by the Church my Mother, I willingly submit myself unto her Decisions. Where I am left at large to my own election, I shall as willingly take leave to descent from others, as others I am sure will take (and on God's name let them) to descent from me. This was the amicable temper of the Fathers in the Primitive times, which more preserved the Church both in peace and unity, than all the Canons of Councils, and Edicts of Princes to that purpose, were of power to do. Non tam stultus sum ut diversitate explanationum tuarum me laedi putem, quia nec tu laederis si nos contraria senserimus 
(e) August. Epist. 13. . This was St. Hieromes resolution to St. Augustine in a point between them; equally full of piety and Christian courage. And of this temper was also Pope Sixtus the fifth, as stout and resolute a Prelate as ever wore the Triple Diadem, and one who lived in the worst Ages of the Church of Rome, when most engaged in self-interresses and maintaining factions. Of whom it is notwithstanding said by Cicarella, non multum pugnare, ut sua vinceret sententia, sed potius ab aliis (si ita res ferret) facile passus est se vinci. And to this blessed temper, if we could attain, diversity of opinions, and interpretations, so they hold the analogy of the faith; may add as much to the external beauty of the Church of Christ, as it did ornament and lustre to the Spouse of Christ, that her clothing though of pure gold, was wrought about with divers colours 
(f) Psal. 45.10, 14. , or wrought with curious needlework, as it after followeth. But it is time that I look back upon our Saviour sitting at the right hand of God, in whatsoever sense we conceive the words; and sitting there to execute the Sacerdotal or Priestly function: and so much of the Regal also, as is to be discharged and exercised by him, before his coming unto judgement. Of which two functions, by God's grace, I am next to speak. The Attribute or Adjunct of the Father Almighty, which we find added to this branch of the Article, hath been already handled in its proper place; and therefore nothing need to be said here of it.   

CHAP. XIII. Of the Priesthood of our Lord and Saviour which he executeth sitting at the right hand of God; wherein it was foresignifyed by that of Melchisedech; in what particulars it consisteth; and of Melchisedech himself.  
WE told you in the beginning of our former Chapter, that they which do consider Christ in his several offices, and did reduce each several office to some branch or other of the Creed; did generally refer his office of high Priest, unto this branch of sitting at the right hand of God the Father Almighty. For being advanced to such a place of nearness to the throne of God, he hath, no doubt, the better opportunities (as a man may say) of interceding with God in behalf of his people, and offering up the people's prayers to the throne of grace; which are the two main parts of the Priestly function. And yet this sitting at the right hand of God is not precisely proper and peculiar to him as he is our Priest: but that he claims the place also as he is our King, and there doth execute so much of the Regal office, as doth consist in governing his holy Church, until the coming unto judgement. Certain I am that David finds him sitting on the right hand of God, in both capacities, as well King as Priest; and so doth represent him to us. The Lord, saith he, said unto my Lord, sit thou at my right hand 
(a) Psal. 110.1.  till I make thy enemies thy footstool. That David by those words, My Lord, meaneth, Christ our Saviour, is a thing past question: We have the truth itself to bear witness to it; the Lord himself applying it unto himself in his holy Gospels. And that he meaneth it of Christ both King and Priest, is no less evident from the rest of the Prophet's words, which do immediately follow on it. For in the very next words he proceedeth thus, The Lord shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion; Rule thou in the midst of thine enemies 
(b) V. 2, 3. ; Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power. In which assuredly he looks upon him in his regal function. And no less plainly it doth follow for the Priesthood also. The Lord hath sworn, saith he, and shall not repent, thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedech 
(c) V. 4. . Touching the Regal office, though here also executed, we shall more fully and more fitly speak in the following Article, that of his coming to judge the quick and dead: the power of judicature being the richest flower of the regal diadem. The Priesthood we shall treat of now; 'tis the place most proper: Christ's Priesthood and his sitting at the right hand of God, being often joined together in the holy Scripture. Nay therefore doth he sit at the right hand of God, that so he might with more advantage execute the Priestly office. Every Priest (saith the Apostle) standeth daily ministering, and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins 
(e) Heb. 10.11, 12. : But this man (that is Christ our Saviour, the high Priest of the new Testament) after he had offered one sacrifice for our sins, is set down for ever at the right hand of God; From hence forth tarrying till his enemies be made his footstool. And in another place to the same purpose thus 
(f) Heb. 8.1. , We have such an high Priest that sitteth on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; A Minister of holy things, and of the true Tabernacle, etc. Being therefore in this place to speak of the Priesthood of CHRIST, we will consider it in all those particulars, which may make the calling warrantable to himself, and comfortable unto us. To make it warrantable in respect of himself, we must behold him in his calling, in his consecration, and finally in the order itself, which was that of Melchisedech, to which he was so called and consecrated. To make it comfortable in regard of us, we will behold him in the excercise of those three great duties, wherein the Priesthood did consist, viz. the offering of sacrifice for the sins of the people, the offering of prayers in behalf of the people, and lastly in the act of benediction or of blessing the people. To these heads all may be reduced which concerns this argument; and of all these, according to the method now delivered which I think most natural, a little shall be said to instruct the reader.  
First, for his calling to the Priesthood, it was very necessary, as well to satisfy himself, as prevent objections. For Christ our Saviour being of the line of judah, he could not ordinarily and of common right intermeddle with the Priestly function; which was entailed by God, to the house of Aaron; and therefore he required a special and extraordinary warrant (such as God gave Aaron, and the sons of Aaron) to authorise him thereunto. No person (whatsoever he was) was to take this honour to himself, but he that was called of God, as Aaron was 
(g) Heb. 5.4. , as St. Paul averreth. Now such a calling to the Priesthood as that of Aaron, our blessed Saviour had, and a better too; for he was called [to be] an high Priest after the order of Melchisedech 
(h) V. 10. . Where this word called imports more than a name or title, as if he were called Priest, but indeed was none; but a solemn calling or designment unto that high office, a calling far more solemn and of better note than that which Aaron had to the Legal Priesthood. For of the calling of Aaron it is only said, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that he was called by God, is a common word, and therefore like enough 'twas done in the common way. But the calling of Christ, it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is a more solemn and significant word; and intimates that he was solemnly declared and pronounced by God to be a Priest after the order of Melchisedech. Now as the calling was, so was the consecration; in all points parallel to Aaron's, and in some beyond. Aaron was consecrated to the Priesthood by the hand of Moses, but Christ our Saviour by the hand of Almighty God; who long before, as long before as the time of David 
(i) Psal. 110.4. , had bound himself by oath to invest him in it. Aaron's head was anointed only with material oil; Christ's with the oil of gladness above all his fellows 
(k) Psal. 45.7. . The consecration of Aaron was performed before all the people, gathered together for that purpose at the door of the Tabernacle 
(l) Levit. 8.3. ; That of our Saviour was accomplished in the great feast of the Passeover, the most solemn, public, and universal meeting that ever any nation of the world did accustomably hold, besides the confluence and concourse of all sorts of strangers. In the next place the consecration of Aaron was solemnised with the sacrifices of Rams and Bullocks 
(m) Exod. 29.1, 15. : of which that of the Bullock was a sin-offering, as well for Aaron's own sins, as the sins of the people; and of the Rams, the one of them was for a fire-offering or a sacrifice of rest, the other was the Ram of consecration, or of filling the hand. And herein the pre-eminence runs mainly on our Saviour's side, who was so far from needing any sin-offering to fit him and prepare him for that holy office, that he himself became an offering for the sins of others, even for the sins of all the world. And as he was to be advanced to a more excellent Priesthood then that of Aaron, so was he sanctified or prepared (if I may so say) after a far more excellent manner, then with blood of Rams. For he was consecrated, saith the text, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(n) Heb. 9.12. , with his own blood; and with this blood not only his hands or ears were spinkled, as in that of Aaron, but his whole body was anointed: first being bathed all over in a bloody sweat; next with the blood issuing from his most sacred head, forced from it by the violent piercing of the Crown of thorns, which (like the anointing oil on the head of Aaron) distilled unto the lowest parts of that blessed body; and lastly with the streams of blood flowing abundantly from the wounds of his hands and feet, and that great orifice which was made in his precious side. Though our Redeemer were originally sanctified from the very womb, and that in a most absolute and perfect manner; yet would Almighty God have him thus visibly consecrated in his own blood also, that so he might become the author of salvation to all those that obey him, 
(o) Heb. 5.9. , and that he having washed our robes in the blood of the Lamb, might be also sanctified and consecrated to the service of our heavenly father. Finally the consecration of Aaron, and of all the high Priests of the law which succeeded him, was to last seven days 
(p) Exod. 29.30. , that so the Sabbath or seventh day might pass over him: because no man, as they conceived could be a perfect high Priest to the Lord their God, until the Sabbath day had gone over his head. The consecration of our Saviour lasted seven days too, in every one of which although he might be justly called an high Priest in fieri, or per medium participationis, as the Schoolmen phrase it, yet was not he fully consecrated to this Priestly office, till he had bathed himself all over in his own blood, and conquered the powers of death by his resurrection.  
That so it was will evidently appear by this short account, which we shall draw up, of his actions, from his first entrance into Jerusalem in the holy week, till he had finished all his works, and obtained rest from his labours. On the first day of the week (which still in memory thereof we do call Palm Sunday) he went into the holy City, not so much to prepare for the jewish Passeover, as to make ready for his own: and at his entrance was received with great acclamations, Hosanna be to him that cometh in the name of the Lord 
(q) Mat. 21.9. . And on the same day, or the day next following, he purged the Temple from brokery and merchandizing, and so restored that holy place to the use of prayer, which the high Priests of the Law had turned or suffered to be turned (which comes all to one) to a den of Thiefs. The intermediate time betwixt that and the day of his passion, he spent in preaching of the Gospel, instructing the ignorant, and in healing of the blind and lame which were brought unto him▪ in the performance whereof and the like works of mercy, he was more diligent and frequent and more punctual far than Aaron or any of his successors in the legal Priesthood, in offering of the seven day's sacrifice for themselves and the people. On the fifth day, having first bathed his body in a bloody sweat he was arraigned and pronounced to be worthy of death, in the high Priests hall: And on the sixth (according to the jewish account, with whom the evening is observed to begin the day) he went into his heavenly sanctuary to which he had prepared entrance with his precious blood, as Moses at Aaron's consecration did purify and consecrate the material Sanctuary, with the blood of Bullocks and of Rams. Not by the blood of Goats, and Calves, saith the Apostle, but by his own blood, hath he once entered into the holy place, and obtained eternal redemption for us 
(r) Heb 9.12. . Which Sacrifice of the Son of God on the accursed Cross, although it was the perfect and full accomplishment of all the typical and legal sacrifices offered in the law: yet was it but an intermediate, though an especial part of his consecration, to the eternal Evangelical Priesthood which he was to exercise, and not the ultimum esse or perfection of it. That was not terminated till the day of his resurrection, until a Sabbath day had gone over his head; which was more perfectly fulfilled in his consecration, than ever it had been in Aaron's, and the sons of Aaron. For then, and not till then, when God had powerfully defeated all the plots of his enemies, did God advance him to the Crown, to the regal Diadem, setting him as a King on his holy hill, the hill of Zion, and saying to him as it were in the sight of his people 
(s) Psal. 2.6, 7.  Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. And then, and not till then, when he had glorified him thus in the eyes of his people, did he establish him in the office of the high Priest, saying, Thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedech 
(t) Heb. 5.10. . That so it was in his advancement to the throne of his father David, shall be made evident in the course of these present Commentaries; when we shall look upon him as invested with the regal power: And that it was so in his establishment, in the Sacerdotal, shall be made evident by the testimony of the great Apostle, whose words here presently ensue. Christ, saith he, glorified not himself to be made the high Priest 
(u) Ibid. v. 5, 6. , but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee, did confer it on him: As he saith also in another place, Thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedech; that is to say, that from the day and moment of the resurrection at what time the fi●st of the two Prophecies were fulfilled, which God delivered by the mouth of the Psalmist saying, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee, was our Redeemer to begin the execution of the high Priests office, after the order of Meschisedech. And this appears to be the meaning of the Apostle in the present place, by the words ensuing. For presently on the recital of the words before recited, viz. Thou art a Priest after the order of Melchisedech, he adds of Christ, that in the days of his flesh he offered up prayers and supplications, to him that was able to save him from death 
(x) Heb. 5.7. , if he had so pleased. But finding his Father's resolution to the contrary, he learned obedience though a Son by that which he suffered 
(y) Ibid. v. 8. ; and finally that being perfect, or rather consecrated (for so the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth import most properly) he was made the Author of eternal salvation, unto all those that obey him 
(z) Ibid. v. 9, 10. ; and was called (or publicly declared, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) of God an high Priest after the order of Melchisedech. And to say truth, had not the Scriptures been so clear in the proof hereof, yet necessary consequence grounded upon comparing of one text with another, and that applied according to the principles of natural reason; would evince it for us. The Priesthood of Melchise●ech, as the Scripture telleth us, was an everlasting or eternal Priesthood, Thou art a Priest for ever, for no shorter term: and therefore of necessity to be exercised and enjoyed by one, who must be as eternal as the office is: and yet a man, and taken from amongst the Sons of men, to offer guilts and sacrifices for the sins of the people. But such our Saviour was not, take him as a man, though otherwise more qualifyed and prepared then any for so high an office; until he had so crushed and broken all the powers of death, that death had now no longer title to him, or dominion over him 
(a) Rom. 6.9. : which doubtless was performed at the resurrection. And therefore then, and not before, when all the ceremonies of his consecration were fulfilled in order, did he begin to exercise the function of an endless everlasting Priesthood, after the order of Melchisedech.  
The order of Melchisedech, that comes after next. And touching that we will examine these three things; 1. Who Melchisedech was. 2. Wherein his high Priesthood did consist. 3. In what the Parallel doth stand between Christ and him. Concerning the first point, who and what he was, hath been a great dispute amongst learned men: some thinking that he could not be a mortal man, and therefore must needs be either the holy Ghost, or else the Son of God then appearing to Abraham, in the likeness and similitude of an earthly Prince. The last is most eagerly defended by P. Cunaeus a very learned man and a great Philosopher, in his book de Republ. Hebraeorum. The reason of this difficulty and his error, are those words of St. Paul where he describeth Melchisedech to be without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life 
(b) Heb. 7.3. . And this thought he can be no other than the Son of God. Others with greater probability both of proof and reason, declare him to be Sem, the third son of Noah, out of whose loins our father Abraham was descended: and this opinion hath found most acceptance generally amongst the learned, though some of very eminent parts do opine the contrary. But whether he were Sem or not, or rather some petty King of the Land of Canaan, who went forth to congratulate Abraham upon his return; they are much troubled to apply the negative character which St. Paul hath given us, to any upon whom they desire to fasten. The best and clearest resolution of the doubt, which I yet have met with, is that Meschisedech, whosoever he was, is said to be without father and mother, in the same sense, as he is after said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which our Translators render without descent, of which his being without father or mother is one branch or member. And he is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. e. without genealogy (and not without descent, as our English reads) because he hath no predecessor either father or mother amongst the rest of the Patriarches, whose Genealogies are recorded in the book of God. And in this sense, as he is said to have no beginning of days, because the time of his birth is no were remembered; so is he also said to have no end of his life, because neither the time of his death, nor the succession of any after him in his two great offices is specified upon the Registers of sacred writ. And yet if the Catena Arabica be of any credit, we have heard more news of late touching this great man, then hath been, till of late, made known in these Western parts. For in their Marginal notes on the 10. of Genesis they say of Phaleg, of whom we find mention vers. 25. And this Phaleg was the Father of Heraclim, the Father of Melchisedech 
(c) Cited by Mr. Gregory in the Pref. to his Annotat. . But in the Chapter going before his Generation is set down in this formal pedigree, viz. Melchisedech was the son of Heraclim, the son of Phaleg, the son of Eber; And his Mother's name was Salathiel the daughter of Gomer, the son of Japhet, the son of Noah. And Heraclim the son of Eber, married his wife Salathiel, and she was with child, and brought forth a son, and called his name Melchisedech, that is, the King of righteousness, called also the King of Peace. By this account Melchisedech was the sixth from Sem, and Cousin german unto Serug, who was Abraham's Grandfather: and being of the lineage and house of Sem, might well confer that blessing on his Cousin Abraham, which had been given to Sem by their father Noah. And then one of the greatest arguments to prove Mel●hisedech to be Sem, that namely which is borrowed from the form and manner of the blessing which he gave to Abraham, will be answered easily. And were this true, (as I can hardly reckon it for an Historical truth) it might as well be made appliable to Paul's negative Character, according to the former interpretation; as that Melchisedech should be Sem, whose Ancestors and posterity both are upon record in the old Testament and the new; though not delivered us as his by the name of Melchisedech.  
But leaving this unto the credit of the Authors, we must next look upon Melchisedech (whosoever he was) as the Priest of God. And Melchisedech King of Salem (saith the text) brought forth bread and wine: And he was the Priest of the most high God 
(d) Gen. 14.18, 19 ; And he blessed him, (Abram) and said, Blessed be Abram, etc. And Abram gave him tithes of all 
(e) Ibid. v. 20. . In this we find Melchisedech invested with the two great offices of a King and a Priest: the King of Salem, and the Priest of the most high God. Nor was it strange or extraordinary in those times that it should be so: the Principality and the Priesthood in those early days, (yea and a long time after in the Roman Empire) being commonly united in the self same person. Look on him as a King, one that did share in the success of Abraham's victory, and then we find him entertaining this triumphant Conqueror, with a royal feast. And Melchisedech King of Salem brought forth bread and wine. That he did only as a King, as a Princely friend, willing to set forth some refreshment to the wearied Soldiers. Melchisedech King of Salem brought forth bread and wine. It was the King's act, as a King, and for such recorded, before we find any thing spoken of him as the Priest of God. And when we find him spoken of as the Priest of God, we find no mention of his entertainment, of his bread and wine, (That belonged to him as a King) but only that he blessed Abram, and received tithes of him; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the text 
(f) Gen. 14.20. & Heb. 7.6. , that is to say, he tithed him, or took tithes of him, not as the gift of Abram, but his own just deuce. By these two acts of blessing and receiving tithes, the Priesthood of Melchisedech is described by Moses: and by the same only doth St. Paul describe it 
(g) Heb. 7.1, 2. , not obiter or on the by, but where he speaks of him in a set discourse, and from his Priesthood doth proceed unto that of Christ, whom God ordained a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedech. Nothing in the Apostle of the bread and wine; for that concerned him not as he was a Priest, in which capacity only St. Paul looks upon him: and looking on him only in that capacity, he findeth him only as a Priest, to bless and to tithe. He met Abraham (saith St. Paul) returning from the slaughter of the Kings, and blessed him, To whom also Abraham gave the tithes of all. Nothing here spoken of the bread and wine as an entertainment given by a Royal and magnificent Prince to a friend and neighbour, nor as a Sacrifice neither to the most high God, as he was a Priest: which thing the Papists mainly stand for, and marvel that S. Paul took no notice of it. Miror in hoc capite inter tot Similitudines, quibus Melchisedech Christum repraesentat, nihil dixisse de Sacrificio panis & vini, etc. I wonder (saith Mariana, 
(h) Mariana in Heb. c. 7. ) that in this Chapter (Heb. 7.) amongst so many resemblances wherein Christ is made like unto Melchisedech, there is no mention made of the Sacrifice of bread and wine which Melchisedech offered, Gen. 14.18. being a type or Symbol of the sacrifice of the holy Eucharist. But the best is, St. Paul knew better what Melchisedech did, and knew much better how impertinent it would be for his present purpose, which was to parallel Christ's priesthood with Melchisedeches, than any the best learned man in the Church of Rome. And therefore here is nothing to be wondered at, if speaking of him as the Priest of the most high God, he takes no notice of his actions, as he was a King. And for the Sacrifice which they dream of and would force from thence, the better to advance the pedigree of the Romish Mass, it is a thing so inconsistent with the meaning of Moses, that neither the letter of the text, nor any circumstance of the History, nor the general consent of Fathers, nor any Orthodox Rule of interpretation, doth give any countenance at all ●nto it.  
As for the parallel made by the Apostle betwixt Christ and him (which is the third thing to be considered) it consists most especially in these two points: first in the identity of their titles, and then in the performance of their several Offices. First for their titles St. Paul telleth us, that Melchisedech by interpretation is the King of righteousness 
(i) Heb. 7.2. , and that King of Salem signifieth a King of Peace. Such also is our blessed Saviour, not only called in Scripture the Prince of peace 
(k) Isa. 9.6. , but our peace itself, Ephes. 2.14. not only acknowledged by his enemies for a man of righteousness, but righteousness itself in the very abstract, and therefore said by the Apostle to be made our righteousness, 1 Cor. 1.30. Melchisedech was the only King that ever by divine providence or an heavenly calling, was a Priest also of the most high God: and therein a fit parallel for Christ our Saviour, whom God having raised him from the dead, made both Lord and CHRIST, that is to say, both King and Priest; Lord over all the Kings of the earth 
(l) Apocal. 1.5, 13. , and clothed in a garment down to the feet, girded about the paps with a golden girdle (such as the high Priest used to wear) as St. john describes him. Melchisedech was King of Salem, which afterwards being called Jerusalem, became the royal seat of David and the Kings of judah; our Saviour Christ was publicly acknowledged to be King of the jews, and crowned (though with a Crown of thorns) within Jerusalem itself, the imperial City: and doth now reign and shall for ever in the new Jerusalem, whereof more hereafter. The greatest difficulty lieth in the Negative Character, that he was without Father, without Mother, without descent (or Genealogy) having neither beginning of days, nor end of life: and how he may be likened unto Christ in this, or Christ to him in all these particulars, hath very much perplexed the brains of some learned men. For admitting Melchisedech to have neither father nor mother, nor genealogy, nor descent, according to the former construction of it: yet this can no ways be applied unto Christ our Saviour; whose genealogy is recorded by two Evangelists, who had a Mother on the earth and a Father in Heaven. Therefore the best solution is (for aught I can see) to say, that those particulars of this negative Character, without father, without mother, without descent, do all but serve to usher in that which followeth next, viz. 
(m) Heb. 7.3.  that he was without beginning of days or end of life: no mention being made of his predecessors, or of any one that did succeed him in that sacred office. Or else because it followeth after, this description, without father, etc. that he was likened unto the Son of God, and continueth a high Priest for ever: it may be said, that he did purposely divest himself of all natural relations, putting off all references unto Father and Mother, wife and children, which necessarily do represent both a beginning and end of days: that being thus transformed (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the Apostle) and turned out of his own proper and natural shape he might be made more like to the Son of God, who being told that his Father and Mother sought him weeping, seemed not to note their tears or regard their sorrows, but put them off with this short answer 
(n) Luk. 3.48, 49. , Witted ye not that I must go about my Father's business? But take it in the former sense because most received, and then Melchisedech is a perfect type or emblem of our Saviour Christ; who as he had no beginning of days, (●or in the beginning was the word 
(o) Joh. 1.1. , before time itself) So shall he have no end of life, the man CHRIST JESUS being freed from the powers of death, and made by God a Priest for ever, till time be no more, after the order of Melchisedech.  
In the performance of the office which is the next part of the parallel, our Saviour did all that Melchisedech did; and consequently may pretend to all which Melchisedech claimed. Melchisedech blessed Abraham, so the text informs us, and questionless that blessing was accompanied with prayers to God, that he would ratify the blessing then pronounced upon him. Blessed (saith he) be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth 
(p) Gen. 14.19, 20. : And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thine hand. In which we find Melchisedech the high Priest of God, not only blessing Abraham in the name of God, but offering prayers and praises unto God for so great a victory, in behalf of Abram: which are two principal parts of the Priestly function. And these our Saviour did perform as soon as he was consecrated and established in his holy and eternal Priesthood. For after his glorious resurrection, from whence his Priesthood doth commence as before was proved, and before he did withdraw his bodily presence from his Disciples, it is said that he lift up his hands and blessed them 
(p) Luk. 24.50. . And questionless his blessing was accompanied with prayers to God, that he would furnish them abundantly, with all gifts and graces, which were necessary for the Ministry he had called them to: he having told them formerly, and it proved accordingly that he would pray unto his Father to send down the Comforter 
(r) Joh. 14.16. , by whom they should be guided in the ways of truth. Nor did he so accumulate his blessings upon them alone, that he hath none left in store for us. St. Peter hath resolved it otherwise, saying to the jews, that God had raised up his Son Jesus, and had sent him to bless them 
(s) Act. 3.26.  in turning away every one (of them) from his iniquities. And yet this blessing came not to the jews alone, but upon the Gentiles; and for that we have St. Paul to witness, CHRIST, saith he, hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law, being made a curse for us, that the blessing of Abraham might come unto the Gentiles 
(t) Gal. 3.14. . The difference only is in this, that Christ is more authentic and authoritative in his blessings then Melchisedech was. Melchisedech indeed blessed Abraham, but he blessed him only in the name of the most high God, and not as having power to confer the blessing. But Christ doth bless us of himself, by his own authority, and hath withal a power to make good the blessing. All power (saith he) is given me both in heaven and earth, and therefore power to give the blessings of the earth, and the blessings of Heaven, the blessings of this life, and the life to come. Nor are we only blessed by him, in the sense aforesaid, but we are also blessed for him, we are blessed through him, and all unto this end and purpose, to be everlastingly blessed in him. For him it is that we are blessed; and therefore dare not ask any good thing at the hands of God, but it is propter merita jesu Christi, for the merits of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which either explicitly or implicitly is in all those prayers, which we do or aught to make to the Lord our God. Through him it is that we are blessed, he being as it were the Conduit or Channel, through which the blessings of the Lord are conveied unto us: in which regard the Church concludeth most of her forms of prayer, with this solemn clause, per Dominum nostrum I. C. through Jesus Christ our Lord. And finally we shall at last be blessed in him, when we are made partakers of that endless happiness, which formerly consisteth in our union with him; when we are so united to him that we seem to be incorporated in him, and all make up together but one glorious body whereof CHRIST JESUS is the head.  
The next part of the Priestly function, consisted in offering up the people's prayers to Almighty God; or offering up his own prayers for the weal of the people. Melchisedech did both in the case of Abraham; for first he prayed unto God for a blessing on him; and then he praised God in his Name, for his blessings to him. And so doth Christ our Saviour also. St. john who had presented him unto our view, in the first Chapter of the Revelation, clothed in Priestly garments, as before was said; doth in the eight present him in the execution of his Priestly Office. For there he telleth us of an Angel standing before the Altar, having (in his hands) a golden Censer, to whom much Incense was given, that he should offer it with the prayers of all Saints (those upon the earth) upon the golden Altar, which was upon the Throne, vers. 3. This Angel was our Lord Christ jesus, as St. Augustine telleth us, the Mediator of the New Covenant, as the Scriptures call him 
(u) Heb. 12.24. , who offereth up the prayers of his faithful servants to the Throne of God, and adds much also of his own incense, which was given unto him, to offer it together with the prayers of the Saints, that so they might be made more acceptable in the sight of God. This that he doth, and doth it by the virtue of the Priestly function, is more clearly evidenced by St. Paul, This man (saith he, discoursing of our blessed Saviour) because he continueth for ever, hath an unchangeable Priesthood 
(x) Heb. 7.24, 25. , and therefore he is also able to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them. And for performance of this Office, his sitting at the right hand of God doth so fitly serve, as if he were advanced to it for this purpose only. We touched upon this string before, and now to make the Harmony more complete and perfect, I shall add that also of St. Paul in another place, where he brings in our Saviour sitting at the right hand of God 
(y) Rom. 8.34. , and making intercession for us; In this respect he is called the Mediator of the New Testament; Heb. 12.24. that is to say, one that doth intercede betwixt God and man, to make up the breach that was between them, and reconcile poor man to Almighty God. And this is such a trust, such an high employment, as never was committed unto Saints or Angels; but purposely resolved by God for this great High Priest. As we acknowledge but one God, so can we have no more than one Mediator, and this can be no other than our Lord and Saviour. There is one God (saith the Apostle, and one Mediator between God and man, even the man CHRIST JESUS. Do we desire to know more of him in this Office from the holy Scriptures, hear him then speaking of himself, and saying, I am the way, the truth, and the life 
(a) Joh. 10.6. , no man cometh unto the Father but by me. So excellently true is that gloss of Augustine's, Non est quo eas nisi ad me, non est qua eas, nisi per me. Our Saviour in this case, saith he, is both the journey's end, and the way also. Do you desire to hear more from him in this Office from the holy Fathers, take then this passage of S. Ambrose, Ipse est Os nostrum per quod Patri loquimur; he is the mouth by which we speak unto the Father, if we hope to speed.  
To state this point more fully as a point in Controversy, we are to lay these two truths for a certain ground of our proceeding: the first, that men are sinners from the very womb, and all their righteousness no other than a menstruous cloth; the second, that God is a God of pure eyes, and such as cannot patiently behold our iniquities. Such being then the disproportion between God and man, how could God look on man without indignation, or man lift up his eyes to God without confusion? God therefore out of his most infinite mercy gave his Son unto us: first for a Sacrifice, to be the Propitiation for the sins of the world 
(b) 1 Joh. 2.1, 2. , and after for an High Priest to intercede, an Advocate to plead for us, unto God the Father; to be the Mediator between God and man in all cases of difference, and as it were the General Solicitor of our suits and businesses in the Court of Heaven. Nay, having raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places 
(c) Ephes. 1.20. , he made him Master of the Requests, appointing him, and him alone, to receive those petitions and addresses which we make to God, and in our name to tender them unto his Father; adding his own incense unto our sweet odours, that so they might find welcome at the hands of God. And here me thinks, this story of Themistocles will not seem impertinent: 
(d) Plutarch in Themist.  who being banished from Athens, his own native soil, was fain to have recourse to Admetus' King of the Molossians; hoping to find that safety in a strange land, which his own Country could not give him. Being admitted into the King's Chapel, he snatcheth up the young Prince into his arms, knelt down with him before the Altar, and so presented his desires and himself to the King, the young Prince's Father. Which kind of suing or Petitioning, (as my Author tells me) the Molossians held 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to be the most effectual means of dealing with him, and such as could not be denied. I think the Application were superfluous to ingenious ears: yet for the driving of it home to our present point, take it briefly thus; We by our Covenant made to God in holy Baptism, are become Aliens to the world, and as much hated by it, as he at Athens: in that respect as much necessitated to cast ourselves upon the love and mercy of the Lord our God, as he to seek protection in the Court of Admetus. And as the young Prince whom he used as his Mediator, was of a mixed condition between a King and a subject, (the Heir not differing from a servant when he is a child): So is our Saviour also between God and man: God of the substance of his Father before all worlds, man of the substance of his mother born in the world, as Athanasius in his Creed. Finally, as Themistocles did assure himself that he should speed in his requests with King Admetus, because the King's son seemed to solicit for him: so we with greater confidence may proceed in our prayers to God, the Son of God making continual intercession for us, that they may be granted. Where note, that not our pressing into the Chapel, as a thing of course, nor falling down before the Altar as a point of ceremony; but taking Christ into our arms, as he did that Prince, will make our prayers to be effectual. This verified by Christ himself in his holy Gospel. Whatsoever ye shall ask in my Name (saith he) that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son 
(f) Joh. 14.13, 24. . And in another place of the same chapter also, Hitherto have ye asked nothing in my Name; ask, and you shall receive, that your joy may be full.  
If on these grounds we make no other Mediators of Intercession, then him that was the Mediator of Redemption too (for such a nice distinction have some men found out, the better to deceive their own souls, and rob Christ of his glory) Let us not stand accused for Heretics in the Court of Rome: or if we must so stand accused, yet let us still worship the God of our Fathers, after the way which they call Heresy 
(g) Act. 24.14. . Certain I am that in the way which they call heresy, the Lord was worshipped by our Fathers in the Primitive times. Ignatius who lived near the time of the Apostles, and conversed with some of them, willeth us to have Christ only before our eyes, when we make our prayers; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(h) Ignat. Epistola ad Philadelph. . And Irenaeus who lived next to him (I mean in time and not in place) gives this counsel also, Orationes nostras ad Deum dirigere qui fecit omnia, that we address our prayers to him only, by whom all things were made. Origen goes the right way too, though in many other things he was out extremely; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(i) Origen contra Celsum. l. 8. , that we should make our supplications unto God alone, who is over all things; to God alone, as the chief Donour of the blessing, but unto God by Christ as the means to gain it. Remember what was said before out of St. Ambrose, and St. Augustine to the point in hand; and we shall find no other Mediators of intercession in the times of the Fathers, than the man CHRIST JESUS; though those of Rome, in pity, as it were, to our Saviour Christ, whom they would gladly ease of so great a burden, have liberally bestowed the Office on the Saints departed. And though a fuller●search into their Position, is to be made hereafter in a place more proper, when we shall come to speak of the Communion of Saints: yet I shall ask this question first, and then dismiss the cause to another day. My question is, if we must call upon the Saints as our Mediators, but Mediators only of Intercession, whether they do commend our requests to God, immediately by themselves, or by the mediation of Christ our Saviour. If they reply, immediately, and by themselves (as certainly their doctrine doth import no less) what then shall we return in answer to our Saviour words; No man comes unto the Father but by me 
(k) Joh. 14.6. ? No, nor the Saints departed neither if St. Ambrose err not. Eo nisi intercedente, nec nobis nec Sanctis omnibus quicquam est cum Deo 
(l) Ambros. . Nor we, nor any of the Saints, saith that Reverend Prelate, have access to God, but only by the intercession of our Saviour Christ. But if they say, they do it by the mediation of our Saviour, (as needs they must, and indeed some of them do of late) we do but put ourselves to a needless trouble, in making our address to them which cannot help us, nor aid us in our prayers to Almighty God without first going unto Christ for his furtherance in it: Especially considering that our blessed Saviour, to whom the Saints themselves must become Petitioners, hath called us, nay commanded us to come to him, as often as we are heavy laden with sin or misery, upon his gracious promise to relieve us in it 
(m) Mat. 11.28. . Certainly did these men remember the good old rule, Frustra fieri per plura quod fieri potest per pauciora, they would not make more Mediators than their case requires: nor set up such a number of superfluous Priests to become Intercessors for us in the Court of Heaven; instead of that one High Priest whom God hath ordained; one so compassionate to us in our distresses, and every way so sensible of our infirmities.  
For though there be many other qualifications necessary to the constituting of this great High Priest, our Saviour Christ for ever blessed, as namely, to be holy, blameless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and higher than the highest Heavens 
(n) Heb. 7.26. : yet none doth speak such comfort to the souls of men, as that he had been compassed with infirmities, and therefore like to have compassion on the ignorant, and on them that are out of the way 
(o) Heb. 5.2. . And such is our High Priest, our most blessed Saviour, who in the days of his flesh had been so afflicted, exposed unto the scorn of men, and the Temptations of Satan, that he was fain to make his prayers and supplication to his heavenly Father, and that too with strong cries and tears, to be delivered from the dangers which did seem to threaten him. His bloody conflict in the Garden, and that of Eli, Eli, Lamasabachtbani, when upon the Cross, are proof sufficient that he had need of Consolation. And they are proof sufficient for this purpose too, that being he suffered and was tempted, he is able, (yea and willing too) to succour them that are tempted 
(p) Heb. 2.17. , as the Apostle doth infer concerning him. For seeing that such an especial part of the Priestly Office, is to make intercession for us in all our distresses; it seemed expedient to the wisdom of God that he should find just occasion in his own person to offer up prayers and supplications with strong cries for himself. Non ignara mali miseris succurrere disco, said the gallant Lady in the Poet. It was a plausible answer which Mathias Corvinus King of Hungary gave a great undertaker in School Divinity, upon a pretty question which himself proposed. The question was, What reason might induce our Saviour to make S. Peter Head of the Church who had thrice denied him, rather than St. John, the dear Disciple whom he loved, a Virgin, and one never tainted with any crime. To which when the great Clerk could make no reply, but rambled up and down in God's secret Counsels, the King thus solved the Problem for him. 
(q) Galeot. Martius de factis Corvini. c. 30.  Si virgo Johannes & in fide firmus Pontifex fuisset etc. The words are many in the Author, but the sum is this, That if our Saviour had made St. john to be the Head of the Church, he would have looked that all men should have been as perfect and sincere as himself, and so have proved more rigorous and severe in correcting sinners, than the infancy of the Church could bear: whereas St. Peter being conscious of his own infirmities, would sympathise the better with them, and proceed more in his government towards them with the spirit of meekness. Assuredly did I believe that Peter was made Head of the Church, I could not have conceived a more plausible reason which might induce our Saviour unto that Election. But howsoever I shall make this use of the story, that God dealt most exceeding mercifully with the sons of men, in providing such an High Priest for them, as had in all things been tempted like unto themselves; 
(r) Heb. 4.15.  sin only excepted: having made himself an offering for sin, knew better than any of the Saints or Angels could, how to apply the benefit of it to our wants and weaknesses.  
And that indeed is the main business of the Priesthood. For every High Priest is ordained for men, in things pertaining unto God, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins 
(s) Heb. 7.1. , as St. Paul defines him. Which gifts and sacrifices, as they were only types of that gift and sacrifice which Christ made of himself for the sins of the world: so that oblation being made, there was no longer use of the Legal sacrifice, nor consequently of the Aaronical Priesthood. By this one offering of himself hath ●e made perfect for ever all them that were sanctified 
(t) Heb. 10.14. : and thereby out a signal & remarkable difference, between that one Sacrifice of himself, and the sacrifices formerly required by the Law of Moses. For in the time of the Law the Priesthood daily ministering, and oftentimes offering the same things, which (yet considered in themselves and without reference to his own Sacrifice, in God's secret purpose) could not take away sin. But CHRIST by this one offering of himself for sin, did not only take away the sins of many 
(u) Heb. 7.28. , (even of all those which faithfully believe in him) and sanctify them in his blood by that one offering of his body once for all 
(x) Heb. 10.10. : but having so done what he undertook, and knowing that there remained no other sacrifice to be performed, he sat him down at the right hand of God 
(y) Ibid. 12.13. , expecting there until his enemies be made his footstool. No further sacrifice to be offered then that already offered upon the Cross; for what could follow after Consummatum est, when all which was foreshadowed in the Legal Sacrifices was in that accomplished. And as for that upon the Cross, how it alluded to the Sacrifices of the Old Testament, in what particulars the shadow and the substance held the best resemblance, and of the benefit thereof unto all mankind; we have already spoke in the seventh Chapter, where we were purposely to treat of our Saviour's sufferings. And we have looked upon it also as an especial part of his Consecration unto the everlasting and eternal Priesthood, after the Order of Melchisedech; a Priesthood which consisted not in outward sacrifices, but in prayers and blessings. For when the Son of God our Saviour did offer himself upon the Cross for our Redemption, he neither was a Priest after the Order of Aaron (How could that be, considering he was of the Tribe of judah?) nor after the Order of Melchisedech, (He was not qualified for that till his Resurrection): but a Priest only in fieri, as Logicians call it, in the degrees and progress of his Consecration. Which Consecration once performed, he was no more to offer Sacrifice either bloody, or unbloudy whatsoever; that so he might conform more fully to the Type of Melchisedech; of whom we no where read that he offered sacrifice, further than as it may be intimated in the name of Priest. For though I will not say, and I think I need not be put to it, that Melchisedech never offered any Sacrifice: yet since we do not read of any, I may safely say, that that part of his Sacerdotal function is purposely omitted by the holy Ghost, that so he might more perfectly represent our Saviour's Priesthood, who after he was consecrated to that sacred Office, had no more sacrifice to offer. And possibly it might be done in the way of prevention, to keep the Church from error in this point of the Sacrifice: who not content with the Commemoration of it, the Eucharistical and Commemorative Sacrifice of his own ordaining, might fall into a fancy of reiterating that one Sacrifice, (as is now practised and defended in the Church of Rome) and make it expiatory of the sins both of quick and dead. How guilty they of Rome have been in this particular, and what strange positions they have broached in pursuit hereof, would appear most fully, if one would look no further than the Council of Trent: from the determinations whereof there lieth no appeal, though sometimes they will find some evasions from it. For in that Council it is said, that in the Masi, our Saviour Christ is really offered by the Priest, unto God the Father 
(a) Concil. Trid. Sess. 21.3. & 22.5. ; that it is the same propitiatory Sacrifice, which was offered by Christ upon the Cross 
(b) Catech. Trident. ; that it is propitiatory for all persons both quick and dead, serving to purge them of their sins, to ease them of their pains, and satisfy for the punishment which they have deserved 
(c) Concil. Trident. Sess. 22. Can. 3. ; that being so beneficial and meritorious to all sorts of people, it is to be reiterated and often offered 
(d) Ibid. , not only day by day, but many times in the same day, as often as the Priest shall think fit to do it. Which doctrine how plainly contrary it is unto our Apostle, the scope and drift of the Epistle to the Hebrews, (especially the ninth and tenth Chapters of it) do most clearly evidence. And though it was a very uncharitable guess of our Rhemish Papists, that the Protestants would have refused this whole Epistle, but that they falsely imagine certain places thereof, to make against the Sacrifice of the Mass 
(e) Rhemists' Testament in the title to that Epistle. : yet we may find by that where the shoe did wring them, and that they thought there were some passages in this Epistle with which their Mass was inconsistent, and which the Protestants might allege, (for I regard not the word falsely) to their disadvantage. Well therefore was it done of the Church of England, not only to assert the true Catholic Doctrine, of the one oblation of Christ finished on the Cross; but to add another Proposition to it, in condemnation of the errors of Rome. The Orthodox truth asserted is St. Paul's expressly, viz. The offering of Christ once made is that perfect Redemption, Propitiation, and satisfaction for all the sins of the whole world both Original and actual; and there is none other satisfaction for sin but that alone 
(f) Article 31. . The conclusion followeth naturally on the former evidence, viz. Wherefore the Sacrifices of Masses, in which it was commonly said, that the Priest did offer Christ for the quick and the dead, to have remission of pain or guilt, were blasphemous fables and dangerous deceits. For what fable can be more blasphemous, then that a poor Priest should have power to make his Maker; that having made him with the breath of his mouth, he should fall down and worship what himself had made; that having worshipped him as God, he should presume to lay hands on him, and offer him in sacrifice assoon as worshipped; that his oblation, thus made, should be efficacious both to quick and dead, both to the absent and the present; and finally that such as be present at it, may, if they find their stomaches serve, devour their God? A thing, of such reproach & scandal to the Christian faith, that Averro the Moor, but a very learned man, and a great Philosopher, hath laid this stain or brand on the Religion itself, viz. that he had traveled over most parts of the world, but never found a wickeder and more foolish Sect then that of the Christians. His reason is, Quia deum quem colunt dentibus devorant 
(g) Espencaeu● de Euchar. Adorni. l. 43. , because they did devour the God whom they worshipped. And what deceit can be more dangerous to a Christian soul, then that which leads him blindfold into gross idolatry, and teacheth him to give Divine honour to a Deity of a poor Creatures making? for though the Elements be sanctified by the Word and prayer, and are made unto the faithful receiver the very body and blood of Christ, yet are they still but bread and wine as before they were. When therefore we encounter with some passages in the works of the FATHERS, in which they either speak of the daily Sacrifice, or say that Christ is daily offered on the Altar, as sometimes they do: we must not understand them of a Real Sacrifice, as to the offering up of Christ unto God the Father, a Sacrifice propitiatory to the quick and dead, such as is now maintained in the Church of Rome; but only of an Eucharistical and Commemorative Sacrifice, which by Christ's death is represented to the eyes of the people, which is the Sacrifice defended by the Church of England.  
But here perhaps it will be asked, that if our Saviour be to offer no more Sacrifice, and that which he once offered upon the Cross, be not to be reiterated, as the Priest thinks necessary; what use there is to us of his Priestly Office, as concerning Sacrifice. I answer with St. Paul on another occasion, much every way. For though he offereth no more Sacrifices then that made already; yet the effect and fruit thereof is still to be applied to the souls of men, the merit of it still to be represented in the sight of God. Of these the first may seem to be the Office of the holy Ghost; but the later most assuredly is the Office of our High Priest, and of him alone. Who when he finds his heavenly Father troubled with our perverseness, our high hand of sinning, and ready to execute vengeance on us for our great misdeeds: doth interpose the merit of his death and passion, shows him the print of the Thorns in his sacred head, his hands and feet boared through with nails, and his side pierced with the spear. At sight whereof Gods heavy anger falls away, and his wrath is pacified, and he lays by the instruments of his rage and vengeance; Tela reponuntur manibus fabricata Cyclopum 
(i) Ovid. Metamorph. l. 1. ; as the Poet hath it: and he resolves to tarry a little longer and expect the amendment of his people. An Office from the which our High Priest never can desist whilst there are men upon the world to provoke God to anger; and though we dare not say of him, as St. Paul did of himself, that he dyeth daily 
(k) 1 Cor. 15.31. ; yet we may safely say, and make it the rejoicing which we have in CHRIST JESUS our Lord, that the merit of his death and passion, are daily, hourly, nay continually, presented by him to the view and consideration of Almighty God. A point of no mean consolation to us, whilst we are subject to the sins and lusts, which we bear about us in the flesh; and cannot otherwise be excused from them but by changing our mortal into immortality. And this is that which was prefigured in the Law of Moses, by the High Priests entering into the Sanctum Sanctorum, which was parted with a vail or traverse Curtain from the rest of the Temple, to make atonement with the Lord for the people's sins. The parallel stands thus between them. First none might enter into the Sanctum Sanctorum, or the holiest of all, but the High Priest only, Levit. 16.3. So Christ our High Priest, and none but he, hath entered into the holy places not made with hands, to appear in the presence of God for us, Heb. 9.24, Secondly, as the veil of the Temple was lifted up or drawn aside, to make room for the High Priest to enter into it: so did the vail of the Temple rend in sunder at the very instant, when the soul of our High Priest did depart from his body, and enter the Celestial Sanctuary, Mattb. 27. Thirdly, the High Priest was apparelled in his Priestly vestments, Levit. 16.10. and so our Saviour is described in the Rev. 13.13. Fourthly, the High Priest, entered into the Sanctuary but once a year, which was upon the Feast of the Expiation, Exod. 30.10. So did Christ enter once into the holy place, which was upon the day (of his death and passion) whereon he obtained eternal redemption for us, Heb. 9.12. And last of all, as the High Priest made an offering for the sins of the people, though it were only of the blood of Calves and Goats, before he went within the veil, Levit. 16.12. & 15. which blood he was to sprinkle on the Mercy-seat, vers. 14, 15. and thereby made atonement in the holy place for all the Congregation of Israel, vers. 17. So before Christ our High Priest entered into the Heaven of glories, he made an offering of himself, Heb. 9.25. and by his own blood entered into the holy places, vers. 12. which blood of his, that is to say, the merits of it, he sprinkleth on the Mercy-seat of Almighty God, and thereby doth avert him from his displeasure, and reconcile him daily to poor sinful man. Which Parallel thus made, we may the better understand St. Paul's drift and meaning, in comparing the High Priests together, and the excellency of Christ's Priesthood above that of Aaron. The Priests, saith he, (i. e. those of inferior order) went into the first Tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God; But into the second went the High Priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself and for the errors of the people 
(l) Heb. 9.6, 7. . But Christ being made an High Priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect Tabernacle not made with hands 
(m) ver. 11.12. ; neither by the blood of Goats and Calves, but by his one blood did he enter into the holy place, having obtained eternal Redemption for us. Not that he should offer himself often, as the High Priest entered into the holy place every year with the blood of others 
(n) vers. 25. ; but that being offered once a sacrifice for sin, he might for ever sit at the right hand of God, chap. 10. ver. 12. to appear in the sight of God for us 
(o) vers. 24.28.  unto our Salvation, and to make intercession for us 
(p) Heb. 7.25. .  
Thus standeth the case with our High Priest in the point of Sacrifice; in which, as in the other Offices, of offering up our prayers to God, interceding for us, and pouring down his blessings on us, he doth perform the Office or Function of an High Priest for ever, after the Order of Melchisedech. But there is yet one Argument more that St. Paul brings in proof of Melchisedeches Priesthood; which is, that he tithed Abraham, or took Tithes of him, Heb. 7.2, 9 And if we prove not this also of our Saviour Christ, the parallel betwixt him and Melchisedech will not be complete, nor his high Priesthood so asserted as it ought to be. But herein the Apostle will not fail us neither, affording us two arguments to make good this point, the one derived from the eternity of our Saviour's Priesthood, the other from the Prerogative which Melchisedech had in this particular, above Aaron and the sons of Levi. The first stands thus: Melchisedech took Tithes of Abraham in his own right, as Priest of the most high God; whose Priesthood being everlasting in the Person of Christ, (for he hath an unchangeable Priesthood, vers. 24.) the right of taking Tithes is inherent in him, on the mere taking on himself of Melchisedeches function; I mean in being made a Priest for ever, after the Order of Melchisedech. And this is that to which St. Paul alludeth, saying, Here, men that die receive Tithes 
(q) Heb. 7.8. , that is to say, Here, in the land of Canaan, by the Law of Moses, the Priests and Levites of our Nation being mortal men, and subject to the stroke of death aswell as we, do receive tithes of us, to show that we acknowledge them to be our Superiors in their place and Ministry. But there he receiveth them of whom it is witnessed that he liveth; His meaning is, that when Melchisedech received Tithes of Abraham, he received them as a Type of our Saviour Christ, who now liveth with God, and by his Resurrection did make known that he liveth for ever, and lived to execute the Office of a Priest for ever, after the Order of Melchisedech. He then of whom it is witnessed that he liveth, receiveth Tithes, or hath at least a right and title to receive them, in regard of his unchangeable and eternal Priesthood. But he receiveth them not in person; having transferred all his interests in them, and title to them, upon the Ministers of his Gospel. No otherwise than God conferred the Tithes of the land of Canaan on the Priests and Levites, being his in his own right, Originally, by the law of Nature, and by him challenged and appropriated as his own domain. All the Tithe of the land, whether of the seed of the land, or of the fruit of the tree, is the Lords 
(r) Leu. 27.30. . Here's the Lord's claim and title to them, as his own propriety. Behold I have given the children of Levi all the Tenth, (or Tithes) in Israel, for an inheritance, for the service which they serve, even the service of the Tabernacle of the Congregation 
(s) Numb. 18.22. . There's the collation of his right on the Tribe of Levi, whom he made choice of to attend in his holy Tabernacle, and to do service at his Altar. And they continued the inheritance of the Tribe of Levi, until the Priesthood was translated unto Christ our Saviour; who being made by God the true owner of Tithes, a Priest for ever after the Order of Melchisedech, became invested ipso facto with that right of Tithing, which God had formerly conferred on the Priests and Levites; and consequently with a power of disposing of them, to them that minister in his Name, to the Congregation. The second argument which the Apostle doth afford us in this case of Tithes, is the Prerogative which Melchisedech ha● i● that particular above Aaron, and the sons of Levi. Levi also (saith he) which received Tithes, paid Tithes in Abraham; for he was yet in the loins of his Father when Melchisedech met him, Heb. 7.9, 10. Then which there cannot be a stronger and more pregnant argument to prove that Tithes are no Mosaical institution, or the peculiar maintenance of the Levites; but that they are derived from an higher Author, and are to be continued to the Ministers of a better Testament 
(t) Heb. 7.22. . For the Apostle taking on him to prove this point, that the Priesthood after the Ord●● of Melchisedech was better and more perfect than that which was according to the Order of Aaron; useth this argument to evince it, and it is a weighty one indeed, that Levi himself, though he received Tithes of his brethren by the Lord's appointment, yet he and all his Tribe paid their Tithes to Melchisedech, being all virtually and potentially in the loins of Abraham, at such time as Melchisedech met him; and consequently being as effectually tithed in Abraham, as all mankind have sinned in Adam, from whose loins they sprung. Nay we may work this argument to an higher pitch, and make the full scope of it to amount to this, That if the Tribe of Levi had been in full possession of the Tithes of their Brethren when Melchisedech met with Abraham and blessed him, as became the High Priest of God to do; or if Melchisedech had lived in Canaan till their settling in it, they must and aught to have done as their Father did, and paid their Tithes unto Melchised●eh, as the Type of Christ, in reference to his everlasting and eternal Priesthood. But seeing that this common place hath been so much beaten on, I shall only alter some few words of that Noble Gentleman and great Antiquary Sir Henry Spelman, to make his argument more suitable to my present purpose; and so close this point. Insomuch (saith he) as Abraham did not pay his Tithes to a Priest that offered a Levitical Sacrifice of Bullocks and Goats, but unto him that presented him with Bread and Wine, which are the Elements of the Sacrament ordained by Christ: this may serve well to intimate thus much unto us, that we are to pay our Tithes unto that High Priest, an High Priest of Melchisedeches Order, who did ordain the Sacrament of Bread and Wine; and unto them in his behalf, who by his Ordinance and appointment in the Word, Hoc facite, administer the same unto us. And so much for the Sacerdotal Office of our Lord and Saviour, which he doth execute for our good, at the right hand of God; we now proceed unto the Regal: which though it is most eminent in his coming to judgement, and so more properly to be handled in the following Article: yet for so much thereof as is exercised at the right hand of God; we shall reduce it under this, in the following chapter.   

CHAP. XIV. Of the Regal or Kingly Office of our Lord as far as it is executed before his coming unto judgement. Of his Vice-gerents on the Earth, and of the several Viceroys put upon him by the Papists and the Presbyterians.  
WE have not yet done with this branch of the Article, that of our Saviour's sitting at the right hand of God. For of the three Offices allotted to him, that of the Priest, the Prince, and the Prophet, all which are comprehended in the name of CHRIST: that of the Priest, is wholly executed as he sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty. And so is so much also of the King, or the Regal Office, as doth concern the preservation of his Church from the hands of her enemies, the Regulating of the same by his holy laws, and indeed every act and branch thereof except 〈◊〉 of judicature, which is most visibly discharged in the day of judgement. Of all the rest we shall now speak; and for our better method and proceeding in it must recall to mind, that we told you in our former Chapter, how both the Kingdom and the Priesthood of our Saviour Christ, did take beginning at the time of his Resurrection. He was before a King Elect designed by God to this great Office from before all worlds; but not invested with the Crown, nor put into the possession of the Throne 〈◊〉 David, till he had conquered Death, and swallowed up the grave in victory. That he was King Elect, and in designation, is evident by that of the Royal Psalmist, where he brings in God Almighty speaking of his only Son, and saying, I have set my King upon my holy hill of Zion 
(a) Psal. 2.6. : as evident by that of the Prophet Daniel, where he telleth us that in those days (those days which the Apostle calleth the fullness of time 
(b) Gal. 4.4. ) the God of Heaven shall set up a Kingdom, which shall never be destroyed 
(c) Dan. 2.44. ; which can be meant of none but the Kingdom of Christ. And that we may not have the testimony only of Kings and Prophets, which were mortal men, but also of the blessed Angels, those immortal Spirits: we have the Angel Gabriel, saying of him to his Virgin-Mother, that the Lord would give unto him the Throne of his Father David, and of his Kingdom there should be no end 
(d) Luk. 1.32, 33. . But yet he was but King Elect, and in designation; born to the Crown of the Celestial land of Canaan, as the Heir apparent; and by that name enquired for by the Wise men, saying, Vbi est ille, qui natus est Rex judaeorum 
(e) Mat. 2.2. , i. e. where is he that is born King of the jews, as our English reads it. And so do all translations else which I have seen, except Bezas and the French which doth follow him; And he indeed doth read it in a different way, Vbi est Rex ille Judaeorum, qui not us est. But I will not now dispute this point of the translations. Suffice it that our Saviour was designed to the Crown of David, long before his birth, and did not waive his title to it, when he was alive. Yet was he not actually inaugurated till his resurrection, nor intronized at God's right hand, until his ascension. That he was a King in designatiton long before his birth, we have proved already. And that he did not waive the title when he was alive, is proved as plainly by that part of the accusation which the Priests and Pharisees made against him, objecting that he called himself Christ a King 
(f) Luk. 23.2. , And when he was interrogated on that Article by Pontius Pilate, viz. Art thou the King of the jews or not; he let it pass as a thing granted, with a Tu dixisti, thou hast said it 
(g) V. 3. , only distinguishing of his Kingdom, and telling him upon more discourse about that point, that his Kingdom was not of this world 
(h) Joh. 18.39. . That was enough to rectify the error, and possess the Deputy that he had no designs to disturb the State, or set on foot his claim to the Crown of Israel, though he was sure of finding a considerable party amongst the people; who would have made him King by force 
(g) Joh. 6.15. , if he had not removed himself out of their sight. And yet had God some further evidence to extort from Pilate, and not from him only, but from all his Soldiers, touching the Kingdom of his CHRIST. The Soldiers they arrayed him in a purple or imperial robe, they set the Crown upon his head (though a Crown of thorns) they put a sceptre in his hand, and then bow the knee, saying, Hail King of the jews. Their purpose I confess was only to expose him to contempt and laughter. But God had also his ends in it, and in the vanity of this humour brought forth that acknowledgement which in a serious way they had never uttered. A deo veritas ab invitis etiam pectoribus erumpit 
(h) Lact. l. 2. c. 1 , said Lactantius truly. So Pilate before whom he had been accused for taking to himself this title, did on the Cross confirm it to him; and freely granted him that honour, for taking which (or nothing) he had been condemned. JESUS OF NAZARETH KING OF THE JEWS 
(i) Joh. 19.19. , was a fair, testimony to proceed from the mouth of Pilate: the fairer in regard that he stood resolved not to have it altered; but made this peremptory answer when the Priests proposed it, Quod scripsi scripsi 
(k) V. 22. , what I have written I have written. God certainly was in pilate's mouth, and he knew it not. For thus became Christ's title manifested to the Greeks and Romans, and published all abroad by those very means which were intended to suppress it. So unsearchable are the Counsels of Almighty God, and his ways past finding out, as the Prophet hath it.  
A Kingdom than our Saviour had, and that acknowledged and confessed by his very enemies; though all of them mistaken in the nature of it. And to say truth, the general opinion of Christ's temporal Kingdom was become so epidemical a disease amongst jews and Gentiles; that neither the wisdom of the Grecians, nor the word of God amongst the jews, nor God the word then conversant with his own Disciples could remove the malady. And first beginning with the jews, the Oracles of God had long since promised a Messiah, but they were wretchedly deceived in the manner of his coming to them, expecting such a one as should be answerable to their present miseries, and free them from that yoke of bondage which the Romans at that time had laid upon them. And as the wise Philosopher tells us, that the same man doth place his summum bonum upon divers blessings, (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(l) Arist. Ethic. lib. 1. , being sick he thinks it to consist in health, if poor in riches): even so this people being under the captivity of a second Babylon, dream of no other happiness then present liberty. For this cause they expected such a Messiah, whose sword should free them from that thraldom; whose Kingdom should be more apparent to the faith of the eye, than the eye of faith. This was it which made Herod tremble, and all Jerusalem with him (i. e. as many in Jerusalem as did hold his faction) when the wise men demanded saying, Where is he that is born King of the jews 
(m) Mat. 2.2. ? This made him murder the young children in Bethlem judah, and amongst them one of his own sons, as the story telleth us; a man more cruel in his fears then in his anger. The Courtiers most, and many of the better sort of people also were all alike possessed with the same poor fancy. For seeing the glory of Herod's Palace and experimentally knowing his prowess, they conceived him to be the Messiah: and on that ground, as many learned men are of opinion, were called Herodians 
(n) Epiphan. alii . Asdruball for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the base and ignoble multitude, certain it is that the ambition of their hopes did ascend no higher. Upon which ground, some of them flocked unto Theudas, who boasted of himself to be some great body 
(o) Act. 5 36, 37. , others to judas of Galilee, who exhorted not to pay tribute: both thought to be the King they had so long looked for, but miserably deceived in both, as the issue proved. Their expectation of a temporal Messiah did not fail them yet. CHRIST is the next they set their rest on, and would have made him King by force: He that could feed so many thousands with a few loaves of bread, was likely to maintain an Army with no charge at all. Afterwards in the days of Hadrian the Roman Emperor, they placed their hopes on one Barchochab. His name did signify as much as the son of a star, which made them take him for that star of jacob, of which Balaam prophesied, and taking him for such to reverence him as Eusebius tells us 
(p) Euseb. Eccl. hist. l. 4. c. 6. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as if he were a star which came down from heaven. A Star indeed he proved, but a falling star, drawing the people generally into rebellion against the Romans; on which they were for ever banished from their native Country. Nor was it thus only with the jews in general, but those who had more near relation to their Lord and Saviour. The Secretaries to this King the Apostles, had all of them their hope stonger than their faith: and did already contend amongst themselves, which of them should be greatest in their Master's Kingdom 
(q) Luk. 22.24. . Not in his Kingdom of grace, nor in that of glory, for they dreamt of neither: but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, his temporal Kingdom rather, which they all looked after 
(r) Theophy. in Luk. 24. . The seventy which were Clerks of his Counsel so conceived it also; and it is no marvel. Nam quis viam rectam teneret errante Cicerone? We thought, said Cleophas, that this had been the man that should have delivered Israel 
(s) Luk. 24.21. . Delivered Israel? from whom? Not from sin and Satan; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but from the yoke of bondage which the Romans had then laid upon them. Thus was it also with the whole body of his Disciples when convened together, at the very time of his Ascension. Wilt thou at this time, say they, restore again the Kingdom unto Israel 
(t) Act. 1.6. ? The Kingdom? What? Regnum illud temporale quod ablatum erat a judaeis 
(u) Lira in Acta. c. 1. , the temporal power which by the Romans lately had been taken from them. And now I think it cannot reasonably be expected, that the Gentiles should conceive otherwise of the Kingdom of Christ (if they knew any thing at all of it) than the whole nation of the jews, or his own Disciples. Nam post Carthaginem vinci neminem puduit 
(x) Flor. hist. Rom. 1.3. . It was no shame for them to mistake in that, which was not rightly understood by his friends and followers. If they that sat● in the light saw so obscurely, how could they see at all that sat in darkness, and in the shadow of death? There had continued in the East, saith Tacitus 
(y) Tacit. hist. l. 4. , and Suetonius both, a received opinion, fore ut Iudaea profecti rerum potirentur, that out of jewry should proceed a most puissant Prince, who should in fine obtain the Empire over all the world. A report founded questionless upon that of Micah, and to this purpose cited in St. Matthews Gospel, viz. that out of Judah there should come a Governor which shall rule my people Israel 
(z) Mat. 2.6. . This prophecy the Roman Historians of those times referred in the accomplishment unto Vespasian and his sons; who being the Provincial Governors of judaea, did afe●rwards by force of the Eastern Armies, obtain the empire. But it wrought further as it seems upon Domitian, who is reported to have sought out all those of the line of David, which his care and diligence could discover; and to have murdered them being found 
(a) Euseb. Eccl. hist. l. 3.17. . Which howsoever some ascribe to his accustomed cruelty, without further aim: yet I am verily persuaded that jealousy in point of state, the better to secure himself from those on whom that prophecy did reflect originally, did induce him to it. And possible enough it is that Pilate grounding his proceedings on the same mistake, might think quod scripsi scripsi an high part of wisdom; and that therein he did great service to the Roman Emperors, in terrifying others from aspiring to the name of King, which jesus upon so good title, and without any prejudice unto their affairs had presumed to own.  
But all this while he was a King in title only, or a King designed. We must next look upon him as inaugurated, and put in full possession of the regal power. And that this was not done till his resurrection is positively affirmed in two texts of St. Peter, and very concludingly inferred by a text of St. Paul. We will take that of St. Peter first, delivered in the first Sermon that he preached on the Feast of Pentecost, where speaking of the resurrection of our Lord and Saviour, and having pressed the point home to their souls and consciences; he concludeth thus, Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same, Jesus whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ 
(l) Act. 2.36. . Not made him Lord, nor Christ till then, neither King nor Priest. The very same St. Paul affirmeth in more positive terms. Who speaking of the promise which God made to David (that viz. of the 132 Psalm, that of the fruit of his body there should one sit upon his throne for evermore) resolveth it thus, The promise which God made unto our Fathers 
(m) Act. 13 33. , hath he fulfilled in us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again, as it is also written in the 2. Psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. Of this we have already spoken more fully in the 13. Chapter, and therefore shall not need to repeat it here. And if the word head be used in Scriptures and other creditable Authors to signify the King or supreme Governor of a body politic, as no doubt it is; we have St. Paul as positive in this particular as St. Peter was. That so the word head hath been oft times used, I shall not need to prove out of many witnesses, when two or three will be sufficient. Of these the first shall be the Prophet Isaiah, saying, The head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Israel is Samaria 
(n) Isa. 7.8.  they being the principal and commanding Cities of those several Kingdoms. And more than so, the head of Damascus is Rezin, and the head of Samaria is the son of Remaliah, who were the Kings of those two Realms, whereof Damascus and Samaria were the principal Cities. Thus doth the Poet say of Rome, Roma caput mundi 
(o) Prosp. in Carm. , that it was the head of the world, i. e. the chief or commanding state, to which all the residue of the world did owe subjection. And thus doth chrysostom say of Theodosius the Roman Emperor, that he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(p) Chrys. hom. ad Antioch. 2. , the head of all people on the earth. It followeth then, that Christ being called in Scripture the head of his Church, (which is indeed his mystical body) and exercising all that power and authority, which the head hath upon the members of the body natural; must needs be understood for the King thereof, the Prince and Saviour of his people, as St. Peter called him. And that Christ was not made the head of his Church, till the resurrection was accomplished, it's by St. Paul affirmed so plainly and in terminis, that it needs no Commentary. The God of our Lord JESUS CHRIST 
(q) Eph. 1.17, 20, 21, etc.  (saith the Apostle) hath raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, above all principalities, and powers, and might, and dominions (that is to say, above the whole Hierarchy of the Angels) etc. And given him to be head over all things unto the Church which is his body. This makes that clear and evident which before we said, that though our Saviour was designed to the Crown of David long before his birth, yet was he not actually inaugurated till his resurrection, nor enthronized at God's right hand until his ascension.  
And this distinction serves most fitly to clear the meaning of St. Paul in that other place, from which the same may be concludingly inferred. It is a passage in his Sermon made unto the Pisidians, where speaking of the promise which God made to David 
(r) Act. 13.23. , (that viz. of the 132. Psal. That of the fruit of his body there should one sit upon his Throne for evermore, v. 12, 13.) he resolves it thus, The promise which was made unto the Fathers 
(s) v. 32, 33, 34. , God hath fulfilled the same unto us their Children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again, as it is also written in the second Psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. Many Interpreters, I know, both ancient and modern do expound these words of the eternal generation of the Son of God, and fancy to themselves an hodie aeternitatis, something which may be called this day, before all eternity. Which exposition of the words, as it is very justly disliked by Calvin; so is he very unjustly quarrelled for by some latter writers, who look no further on the words then the words of David, and not upon the application which St. Paul makes of them. Clearly St. Paul who spoke by the same Spirit that David did, and therefore could not err in expounding the words of David, intends them neither to CHRIST'S natural birth, as the son of the blessed Virgin Mary, nor his eternal generation as the Son of God; but to his birth day or begetting to the Crown of the heavenly Canaan; the day of their advancement to the regal throne, being esteemed as their birth day by most Kings and Princes. For who so ignorant in the affairs of the world, so little conversant in the monuments of former times, as not to know that it is usual in most States and Kingdoms, not only to celebrate with great feasts and triumphs, the natural birthday of their Kings, which they call Diem natalem imperatoris; but the inauguration day, the day wherein he was exalted to the Crown imperial, which they call Diem natalem imperii. Certain I am that the day whereon Augustus did assume the imperial power, was solemnised in Rome every tenth year with a great deal of joy 
(t) Dion Cass. in August. 1. : and that Caligula did decree, that the day whereon he began his Empire (Dies quo cepisset imperium, as my Author hath it) should be called Palilia 
(u) Spartian in vita Hadriani. , and celebrated as that was by the ancient Romans, in memory that their City was on that day founded. And thus it hath continued in most States of Christendom, but most unprosperously of late (as if it were an Omen of the present troubles) laid aside in ours. And this interpretation of the Psalmists words, receiveth good countenance from another place of the same Apostle, in which those words of David are again recited. The place is this 
(x) Heb. 5.5, 6. , Christ (saith he) glorified not himself to be made high Priest, but he that said unto him, thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee; as he saith also in another place, Thou art a Priert for ever after the order of Melchisedech. The meaning of this passage we have shown before, and is this in brief; that Christ being called by God to the two great offices, those of the Priesthood and the Kingdom, was not exalted unto either, (though designed to both) till God had glorified him in the sight of the people, by his resurrection. And to my seeming, David's words, had not St. Paul conducted us to this exposition, could have no other meaning than is here made of them. For if we mark the composition of the same, and the place in which these words are ranked, we shall find that God had first advanced his King, and set him on his holy hill of Zion, on the royal throne 
(p) Psal. 2.6, 7. ; before, and but immediately before these words, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. But what need one Apostle be called to witness in this point, when we have all that glorious company, the Apostolical College and the rest of their company, apply the whole Psalm to the person of Christ 
(z) Act. 4.27, 28. ; of Christ anointed to the Kingdom by the hands of God, but not till Herod, Pontius Pilate, the Gentiles and the people of Israel had conspired against him, to do whatsoever the hand and counsel of God had before determined.  
Having thus brought our Saviour to the Regal throne, and set him on the right hand of God in the heavenly places; let us next look upon him in his form of Government, according to the arts of Empire. These by the Stalists are reduced unto two heads, the one consisting in protecting and defending the people committed to them, which they call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; the other in prescribing laws, and executing justice on the transgressors, which they term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Both these most perfectly discharged by our Prince and Saviour. And first the Enemies against which he protects his people, are these three, the Devil, sin, and persecution. The two first he discomfited in that painful combat, in which he paid the price of our redemption, and made his passage open to the new Jerusalem. Since that time there is nothing left in Satan but a powerlesse malice; and though he roar against the Church, he shall never devour it. The gates of hell shall not prevail against it 
(a) Mat. 16.18. , said the glorious Conqueror. Sin at the same time lost his strength 
(b) 1 Cor. 15.56. , which was the curse of the Law; and not his strength only, but his Empire too. And though he may sojourn for a time in our mortal bodies, yet shall he never reign over us, and have us in subjection as before he had: unless we willingly betray ourselves, and captivate our souls to those conquered powers, which God hath given us grace to master. Nor deals otherwise with the Persecutors of his Church and people, than he hath done with sin and Satan: whom he doth crush at last with a rod of iron, and break them into pieces like a potter's vessel 
(d) Psal. 2.9. : as David telleth of him in the second Psalm. And though sometimes to manifest his own glory in his people's sufferings, and to make trial of their faith and Christian patience, he doth permit their enemies to prevail against them: yet was he never wanting in his own due time, to make their deliverance more remarkable, than all their afflictions. Witness the persecutions of the primitive times, in which the Princes of the earth and the powers of hell banded themselves against the Lord and against his anointed: times in the which it were a difficulty to determine, whether the gallantry of the Martyrs, or the tyranny of the persecutors gave juster cause of admiration to the sad spectators. With such a cheerful countenance did they bear their sufferings, that they even wearied their torments; and did not lose their lives, but give them. With what a noble confidence did they mount the scaffold, on which they were to suffer the most cruel death, which the wit of man, and malice of the Devil, could inflict upon them: so bravely and without amazement, as if they had been mounted rather to behold a triumph, then to be brought to execution. Never was tragedy of death more bravely acted; nor actor honoured with a richer and more glorious crown. And for his enemies and theirs, the vengeance of the Lord found them out at last, and laid them in the dust with disgrace and ignominy. For which was there of all the persecutors, who made themselves drunk with the blood of the Saints and Prophets 
(r) Apocal. 16. ● ; or that have raged against the Church since those furious times, to whom he gave not blood to drink; whom either in their grey hairs, or in the pride and flourish of all their glories, he brought not to the grave with reproach and sorrow; or left their dead bodies to be meat to the fowls of the Air?  
Next for the Nomothetical arts of Empire, let us look on those; and we shall find that as he came not to destroy the Law of God, but to fulfil it; so hath he added more weight to it, either by way of application or of explication, then before it had. They who consult our Saviour's Sermon on the mount, and look upon his Commentaries on the law of Moses, which the chief Priests and Pharisees had perverted by adulterate glosses; will quickly find that he discharged us not from the Obligation which the moral law had laid upon us, but only did become our surety, and bound himself to see it faithfully performed by us in our several places. The burden was not made less heavy than it was before (I speak still of the Moral Law, not the Ceremonial) but that he hath given more strength to bear it, more grace to regulate our lives by God's Commandments. And somewhat he did add of his own auhority which tended to a greater measure of perfection, then possibly we could attain to by the Law of Moses: and that not only in the way of Evangelical Counsels, (and that there are such Counsels I can easily grant) but of positive precept. For so far certainly we may join issue with the Council of Trent, that JESUS CHRIST is to be honoured and observed, Non tantum ut Redemptor cui omn●s fidant, sedut Legislator cui obediant 
(f) Concil. Trident. Sess. 6. Can. 21. , not only as a Saviour unto whom we may trust, but as a Lawmaker also whom we are to obey. The same position is maintained also by the Arminian party; but not the more unsound for either. Veritas a quocunq est, est a Spiritu sancto, as St. Ambrose hath it. And this is so agreeable to the Word of God, that either we must deny the Scripture, or else confess that it proceeded from the Spirit of God. Nor are his laws endeared only to us, and sugared over as it were, by the promise of a great reward; but enjoined also under pain of grievous punishments: punishment and reward being the square or measure of the heavenly government, no otherwise then of the earthly. Tribulation and anguish (saith St. Paul) shall come upon the soul of every man that doth evil; but glory, and honour, and peace to every man that doth good, to the jew first, and also to the Gentile; for God is no respecter of persons 
(h) Rom. 2.9, 10. . By which two general motives set before our eyes, and the co-operation of the holy Spirit working with his Word, he doth illuminate our minds, and mollify our hearts, and quench our lusts, instruct us in the faith, confirm us in our hopes, and strengthen us in Christian charity: till in the end he bring us to the knowledge of his holy will, then to obedience to his Laws, and finally to a resemblance of his virtues also. If after all this care and teaching either by frailty or infirmity we do break his laws, or violate his sacred Statutes as we do too often; he doth not presently take the forfeiture which the Law doth give him (for then O Lord, should no flesh living in thy sight be justified): but in the midst of judgement he remembreth mercy. We may affirm of him most truly as Lactantius did, 
(i) Lact. l. 1. cap. 1.  Vt erga pios indulgentissimus Pater, ita adversus impios justissimus judex; as terrible a judge he is to impenitent sinners, as an indulgent Father to his towardly children, as before was said.  
Such is the nature and condition of our Saviour's Kingdom, which sitting at the right hand of Almighty God, he doth direct and govern as seems best to his heavenly wisdom; and so shall do until his coming again to judge both the quick and the dead. Although he hath withdrawn himself, and his bodily presence, yet is he present with it in his mighty power, and by the influences and graces of his holy Spirit. And in this sense it was that he said unto them, Behold, I am with you always to the end of the world 
(k) Mat. 28.20. . And that not only with you, my Apostles, unto whom he spoke, but cum vobis & successoribus vestris 
(l) Dionys. Cartbus. in locum. , with all you my Disciples and with your successors also in your several places, till time be no more. Though he be placed above in the heavenly glories, and is not joined unto his Church by any bodily connexion; yet he is knit unto it in the bonds of love, and out of that affection doth so guide and order it, as the Head doth the members of the Body natural. Habet ecclesia Caput positum in Coelestibus quod gubernat Corpus suum, separatum quidem visione sed annectitur Charitate, as St. Austin hath it. Viceroy there needeth none to supply his absence, who is always with us. Nor we the assistance of a Vicar General to supply his place, whose Spirit bloweth where him listeth, and who is linked unto us in so strong affections. But for all this our Masters in the Church of Rome have determined positively, that in regard our Saviour hath withdrawn himself from the Church in his Body, secundum visibilem praesentiam, for as much as doth concern his visible presence: he needs must have some Deputy or Lieutenant General, qui visibilem hanc Ecclesiam in unitate contineat 
(m) Bellarm. de Romano Pont. l. 1. c. 9 , to govern and direct the same in peace and unity. It seems they think our Saviour Christ to be reduced unto the same straits as Augustus was, of whom it is reported in the Roman stories, that he did therefore institute a Provost in the City of Rome because he could not always be there in person 
(n) Dion. Cassius in Augusto. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and durst not leave it absolutely without a Governor 
(n) Dion Cassius in Augusto. . And sure however others may complain of our Saviour's absence, and for that reason think it necessary to have some general Deputy to supply his place: yet of all others those of Rome have lest cause to do it, who can command his presence at all times, and on all occasions. For as Cornelius a Lapide 
(o) A Lapide in cap. 7. Esai.  affirms expressly, by saying only these words, Hoc est Corpus meum, the Bread is not only transubstiated into our Saviour's Body, but Christ anew begotten, and born again upon the Altar. And not his Body only (that's not half enough) but as the Canon of Trent tells us, there is totus Christus una cum anima & Divinitate, 
(p) Lact. l. 2. cap. 6. , whole Christ both body and soul, and the Godhead also, personally and substantially on the blessed Sacrament. That he is present every where in his power and Spirit, there is none of us which denyeth. If they can have his bodily presence also in so short a warning, what use can they pretend for a Vicar General? Adeo Argumenta ex falso petita ineptos habent exitus 
(o) In 3. Sess. sab. jul. 3. Can. 1. , said Lactantius rightly, Besides it is a Maxim in Ecclesiastical Polity, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, &c. 
(q) Conc. Chalcedonens. ▪ that the external Regiment of the Church of Christ is to be fitted to the frame and order of the Civil State. Not if the State were popular (for there were then no popular States when that rule was made), the Government of the Church should be also popular: but that within such principal Cities as were assigned for the residence of the Civil Magistrate, the Prelates of the Church should be also planted. This I am sure no learned Romanist can deny. And granting this I would have any of them show, when any Monarch having divers Kingdoms under his command, did ever yet appoint one General Viceroy to command them all. Certain I am that the Assyrian Monarches had in their several Provinces several Governors, as is apparent out of the Book of Daniel 
(s) Dan. 3.12. . So had the Parsians too in the Book of Hester 
(t) Hest. 3.12. ; and so the Romans too in St. Luke's 
(u) Luk. 3.1.  Gospel: Not to say any thing of the Monarches of the present times, all using the same Arts of Empire. And then what reason can there be, considering that the Church is bound to follow the external Government of the Civil State, that one Lieutenant General should be thought so necessary to govern all Churches in the World; seeing one General Viceroy was not thought sufficient to govern but a few particular Kingdoms? Or were it fit and necessary that it should be so, yet those of Rome can show no more Commission from our Lord and Saviour, for the appropriating of this Office to St. Peter's Chair, than a bare Tradition. For Bellarmine, although he laboured, no man more, in the search hereof, could find no Text in all the Gospel which would serve his turn: and thereupon concludes at last, that howsoever some Supremacy in sacred matters might seem allotted to St. Peter, tamen Pontificem Romanum Petro succedere expresse non haberi in Scriptura 
(x) Bellarm. de Pont. l. 2. c. 12. , yet that the Pope succeeded Peter is not found in Scripture. What then shall we conceive of the Popish Parasites, who give their Pope the title of Vice-deus, as Paulo V. Vice-deo, the Numeral letters of the which make up 666 as one well observeth; but that they are instruments to bring in the Antichrist? What of that horrid blasphemy of Petrus Bertrandus, who boldly taxeth Christ of great indiscretion, in case he had not left behind him such a Vicar General? 
(y) P. Bertrand. de jurisd. Ecclesiast. & civ. c. 7.  Visus esset Deus, ut cum reverentia ejus loquar, indiscretus fuisse, nisi unum post se talem Vicarium reliquisset, as his own words are: and such they are, as never any Christian durst pronounce but he.  
If then it be so disagreeable to the Kingdom of Christ, to have one General Viceroy to direct the whole, let us next see, whether they have not somewhat better provided for him, who would impose upon the Church, as many petite Popes, as there be Parishes; if not three for one. For by their Platform every Parish must be furnished with a distinct Presbytery; and that Presbytery to be absolute within itself, having authority to censure, excommunicate, and what not else, that appertaineth to Ecclesiastical jurisdiction. By means whereof they make Christ's Body far more monstrous than the monster Hydra; not to have seven heads only, but seven hundred thousand. Yet this device both new and monstrous though it be, must needs be reckoned a chief part of our Saviour's Kingdom. For as their Champions gave it out in their public Writings, their Controversy was not only about Caps and Surplices, as the world imagined; but whether JESUS CHRIST should be King or not 
(z) Roger's in his preface to the 39 Articles. . Their Discipline they honoured with the Title of Christ's holy yoke, his Sceptre, and their endeavours, as they said, aimed at this end only, to build up first the walls of Jerusalem, and then to set Christ's Throne in the midst thereof 
(a) Id. ibid. . For why, say they, the planting of Presbyteries is the full placing of Christ in his Kingdom; which whosoever shall reject, (I use their own words still, no others) refuse to have Christ reign amongst them, and do deny him in effect to be their King. Thus went the cry of old for the Presbyterians; and now the Independents use the self same words, appropriating Christ's Kingdom, and his Throne, and Sceptre, unto their separate Congregations and Conventicular meetings. And questionless it were an excellent representation of Christ's glorious Kingdom, to have a company of shopkeepers and inferior handicrafts, sitting upon the bench with their zealous Pastor, as if they were the twenty four Elders in the Revelation 
(c) Apoc. 4.4. , pronouncing some sad judgement on the Tribes of Israel: and after hasten to their Trades, as Quintius the Dictator did unto his plough, ut ad opus relictum festinasse videatur 
(d) Florus hist. l. 2. c. 26. , as my Author hath it. And yet so highly do they magnify this new Kingdom of theirs, which they have raised up for themselves in our Saviour's Name, that Kings and Princes must be suffered to rule no longer, than they submit themselves and their Supreme power to the divine authority of their new Presbyteries. For Beza quarrelleth with Erastus, and thinks him guilty of high Treason against God Almighty, quod Principes & Reges a Divina ista Dominatione exemerit 
(e) Beza de Excommu. adv. Erast. , because he doth not think it fit that Kings and Princes should submit unto this fine yoke, the judgement seat of Christ, as he idly calls it. And some amongst ourselves have not spared to say, that a true government of the Church there can never be, till Kings and Queens submit themselves unto the Church, subject their Sceptres, and lay down their Crowns before this Throne, yea lick up the very dust of the Church's feet 
(f) Roger's in his preface, etc. , and willingly endure such Censures, (be they what they will) as the Divine Presbytery shall impose upon them. Huic Disciplinae omnes Reges & Principes fasces suos submittere necesse est; as Travers once did state it in his Book of Discipline. And could they bring it once to that (as they much endeavour it) it were Regale Presbyterium a Royal Presbytery to the purpose, though not unto the purpose the Apostle speaks of.  
To join these Foxes, the Genevian and Roman, both together, which though they look two several ways, as if they were to run quite contrary to one another; do yet carry firebrands in their Tails, as once sampson's did, and like them are combined to destroy our harvest: I would commend unto them that Viceroy, or Vicar General, (for I perceive they will have one) which once Tertullian did commend to the Primitive Church, even the holy Ghost. For in his Treatise de Virgin. veland. he calleth him in plain terms Vicarium illum Domini Spiritum sanctum 
(g) Tertul. de veland. Virgin. , and doth assign this Office to him, dirigere, ordinare, & ad perfectum perducere Disciplinam, to direct, order, and dispose of us in such a manner, as may make us perfect at the last in all Christian piety. But if they will have nothing to do with the holy Ghost, as I think they will not in this business, we shall then find them lawful Viceroys made of flesh and blood; and those too of Christ's own appointment, not of man's devising. That he doth rule his Church in things which concern salvation, by men in sacred Orders is confessed on both sides: and that he doth preserve the same in external Order, at peace and decency, and in the beauty of holiness, by the power of Christian Princes, is affirmed in Scriptures. Why else are Kings entitled the Nursing Fathers, and Queens the nursing mothers 
(h) Esa. 49.23.  of the Church of Christ, but for the protection which they give, & their superintendency over it in their several Kingdoms? King's are Christ's Viceroys on the earth in their own Dominions, over all persons in all causes, aswell Ecclesiastical as Civil the Supreme Governors. And so are Bishops in the first sense, in their several Dioceses, and under them those Presbyters which have cure of souls. Which lest we may be thought to say without good authority, we call the Popes themselves to witness against those of Rome, (and to the others will say more in the following Paragraph). For Pope Eusebius in his third Epistle decretory, (which whatsoever credit it be of amongst learned men, must be good ad homines) saith plainly that our Saviour is the Church's head; and that his Vicars are the Bishops to whom the Government and Ministry of the Church is trusted. Caput Eccles●ae Christus est, Vicarii autem Christi sacerdotes sunt 
(i) Euseb. Epistol. 3. in Tom. Council. . And Sacerdotes in those times did signify the Bishops, no inferior Order. For further proof whereof (if more proof be needful) consult St. Ambrose on 1 Cor. cap. 11. St. Austin in his questions on the Old and New Testament, qu. 127. The Author of the Imperfect work ascribed to St. Chrysostom, Hom. 17. the Fathers of the Council of Compeigne, and divers others: all of which call the Bishop in most positive terms, Vicarium Christi, the Vicar of Christ. And for the King, so said Pope Eleutherius in a letter of his to Lucius a King of Britain, no great Prince assuredly, but the first Christian Prince that ever was in the world: Vicarius Dei vos estis in regno vestro 
(k) Epist. Eleuth. in leges Ed. Confess. Spelm. in Collect. Concil. , you are God's Viceroy or Lieutenant in your own Dominions. Which title Edgar (as I take it) a West-Saxon King, did challenge as his own of right, in a speech made unto his Clergy in their Convocation, or some such like Synodical meeting. The like occurs of William the Conqueror, who in a Parliament of his is called Vicarius summi Regis, as is said by Bishop jewel in the Defence of the Apology, part. 5. cap 6. sect. 3.  
And this perhaps the sticklers for Presbytery will not stick to grant, who will allow Kings to be God's Vice gerents, so they be not Christ's; and if not Christ's, than not to intermeddle in such things as concern the Church, but to betake themselves merely unto secular matters. Beza hath so resolved it against Erastus. Our Saviour Christ, saith he, hath told us, that his Kingdom is not of this world, adeo ut, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 administrationi nunquam se immiscuerit, and therefore would not be a Judge in a Temporal difference; and thereupon it is inferred, that Secular Princes must not meddle in such things as concern Christ's Kingdom. But none have spoke more plainly in it then our Scottish Presbyters, from Father Henderson down to Cant, and Rutherford; who build their Presbyterian Platform upon this foundation, that Kings receive not their authority from JESUS CHRIST, but from God the Father. Which being so pernicious a Maxim to the right of Kings, and so derogatory to the honour of our Lord and Saviour; I shall in brief sum up some passages in holy-Scripture, and other good authorities from the ancient Fathers, as may abundantly convince them of most gross absurdity, in offering such strange fire in the Church of God. For first our Saviour, who best knew his own Prerogative, hath told us that All power is given to him both in Heaven and Earth 
(n) Mat. 28. ●●. . If all, then doubtless that of ordaining Kings, which are the greatest powers on earth. If all, then must it be by him, as indeed it is, (or Solomon mistook the matter) By whom King's reign and Princes decree justice 
(o) Prov. 8.15. . In reference to this power no question but St. Paul calleth him Rex Regum, or the King of Kings. He is, saith the Apostle, the only Potentate, the King of Kings and Lord of Lords 
(p) 1 Tim. 6.15. . By the same title he is called in the Revelation, chap. 17. vers. 14. And this not only in the way of excellency, because a greater King and a more puissant Lord then any here upon the earth: but also in the way of derivation, because from him all Kings and Princes whatsoever do derive their power. Just so, and in the self same sense, some of the mighty Monarches amongst the Gentiles, having inferior Princes under their command, and such as do derive all authority from them, do call themselves the Kings of Kings. Rex Regum Arsaces, the old style of the Parthian Emperors. This further proved, and very significantly inferred from another place of the Revelation, where it is said of Christ, the Lamb, that he hath on his vesture and on his Thigh a name written, viz. Kings of Kings and Lord of Lords 
(q) Apoc. 19.16. . In which last place there are two things to be observed which concern this point, the one that this name of King of Kings, and Lord of Lords is fixed and settled in Christ's Person, as the Son of man: the other, that all Kings are De femore Christi, certainly of his appointment and Ordination, as if they were descended from his very loins. Nor want we of the Fathers which affirm the same. St. Athanasius paraphrasing on this Text of Scripture, And he shall reign in the house of Jacob for ever, etc. saith plainly 
(r) Athanas. Serm. de B. Virg. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is to say, Christ having received the Throne of David hath transferred the same and given it to the holy Kings of Christians. And so Liberius, one of the Popes of Rome, writing unto the Emperor Constantius (a Prince extremely wedded indeed to the Arian faction) admonisheth him not to fight against Christ, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (s), who had advanced him to the Empire, nor to be so unthankeful to him, as to countenance any impious opinion, that was held against him. Add to these two, though these the great Patriarches of the Roman and Egyptian Churches, the suffrage of the Fathers assembled at the Council holden in Ariminum, who writing to the same Constantius, and speaking of our Lord and Saviour, adds these following words, viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(t) Socrat. Hist. Eccles. l. 2. c. 29. , that is to say, By whom thou reignest, and hast Dominion over all the world. And this, no question, is the reason why all Christian Princes do place the Cross upon the top of their Royal Crowns. For though they use it as a badge of their Christianity, and to acknowledge that they are not ashamed of the Cross of Christ; yet by allotting to it the superior place they publish and confess this also, that they do hold their Crowns by and under him. Let us not then be cheated by this new distinction, that Kings are Gods Viceroys but not jesus Christ's; though the distinction be much hugged by our great Novators. Who intent nothing else thereby but to throw down Crowns and lay them at the foot of their Presbyteries; and to set up instead of the Regal power, their own dear Tribunal, a Sovereignty in all causes Ecclesiastical, to overrule it first, and extirp it afterwards; as the right learned Bishop of Kell-Alla, very well observeth 
(u) Sacros. Regum Majestas cap. 5. .  
In these ways, and by these several means and subordinate Ministers, doth Christ administer the Kingdom committed to him. And this he doth, continually sitting at the right hand of God the Father, and there to sit until his enemies be made his footstool. This David did foresee by the spirit of Prophecy, The Lord (saith he) said unto my Lord (i. e. the Lord God almighty said to my Lord CHRIST JESUS) Sat thou on my right hand until thy enemies be made thy footstool 
(x) Psal. 110.1. . This the Apostle also verifieth and affirms of Christ. But this man after he had offered one Sacrifice for sins is set down for ever on the right hand of God 
(y) Heb. 10.12, 13. , from henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool. And this he also telleth us in another place, saying of Christ that he must reign till he shall have put all his enemies under his feet 
(a) 1 Cor. 15.15. . Till than his Kingdom is to last, and till that time he is to sit at the right hand of God in all power and Majesty. If it be asked when that will be that all his enemies shall be subdued and subject to him; we answer, at the end of this present world, when there is no enemy left to be destroyed. Now the last enemy which is to be destroyed is death 
(b) Ibid. v. 26. , saith the same Apostle. And thereupon we may infer, that while death reigneth in opposition to the Lord of life; and sin in a defiance to the Lord of righteousness, that hitherto we have not seen all things put under him 
(c) Heb. 2.8. ; and therefore must expect yet a little longer, before he shall deliver up the Kingdom unto God the Father. But then indeed when Death is utterly destroyed, and all the Saints admitted to the glories of eternal life, when all things are subdued unto him, than also shall the Son himself be made subject to him, that did put all things under him, that is God the Father 
(d) 1 Cor. 15.28.24. : Then when he hath put down all rule, and all authority, and power, then cometh the end, and then he shall deliver up the Kingdom unto God the Father, that God may be all in all. This is the sum of St. Paul's argument in that point. In which there being many things not easy to be understood, I shall not think my time ill spent, to make a short Paraphrase and discourse upon it, that so we may perceive more fully the Apostles meaning. And first he saith that CHRIST must reign till he hath put all things under his feet, that being one of the especial parts of the Kingly function, as before was shown, to save and defend his Church from the hands of her enemies; and for the enemies themselves, to crush them with a Sceptre of iron, and break them in pieces like a Potter's vessel. When this is done, when he hath trodden under foot all his mortal enemies, the persecutors of his Church, false Prophets, false Apostles, and the great Antichrist himself, which labour to seduce even the very Elect: when he hath subjugated the powers of Hell, and that sin hath no more dominion over us, yet we shall still lie under the power of death until the last and general Resurrection. Death therefore is the last enemy to be destroyed, that being delivered from his thraldom, raised from the grave which is his prison, and all those bonds and fetters broken by which we were held captive under his command, we may be made partakers of eternal life, and reign with Christ for ever in his heavenly glories. When that time cometh, when there are neither enemies from which to protect his Church, nor any Church to be instructed in the ways of godliness, according to the Nomothetical part of the Regal Office: then cometh the end, the end of all things in this world, which shall be no more; the end of Christ's Kingdom, as the Mediator between God and man, man having by the power of his mediation, attained the end of his desires, the guerdon and reward of his faith and piety. This being done, the rule of Satan, and the authority of sin, and the power of death, being all broken and subdued; he shall first raise our mortal bodies in despite of death, pronounce the joyful sentence of absolution on them in despite of sin; and finally advance them to that height of glory from which Satan fell, to the confusion of the Devil and all his Angels. And having so discharged the Office of a Mediator, for executing which he sat at the right hand of God, he shall deliver up unto God the Father, the right and interest which he had in the Kingdom of Grace, consisting in the building up of his Elect in faith, hope, and charity, that they with him, and he with them, may reign forevermore in the Kingdom of glory. Where there shall be no use of Faith, for they shall see God face to face, and faith is the existence of things not seen 
(e) Heb. 11.1. ; and less of hope, for hope is the expectance of things desired, which being once obtained puts an end to hope. Charity only shall remain, for that never ceaseth 
(f) 1 Cor. 13.8. , and therefore said to be the greatest of the three Theological virtues, of which the Apostle there discourseth, 1 Cor. 13.13▪ And so Primasius hath resolved it. In this present life (saith he) there are three, in the life to come only the love of God, and his Augels and of all the Saints. That therefore is the greater which is always necessary, then that which once shall have an end 
(g) Primas. Hom. 34. in 1 Cor. . The like St. Austin before him, The greatest of all is charity, because when every one shall come to eternal life, the other two failing, charity shall continue with increase, and with greater certainty 
(h) Aug. de Doct. Chr. l. 1. c. 39 . And finally before both, thus St. chrysostom (and these three witnesses enough), The greatest of these is Charity, because they pass away, but that continueth 
(i) Chrysost. in 1 Cor. c. 13. .  
I must confess there is hardly a more difficult Text in all the Scripture, than this of Christ's delivering up the Kingdom unto God the Father; nor which requires more care in the Exposition, for fear of doing injury unto God or Christ; (conceive me still of Christ in his humane nature.) For neither must we so understand the place, as if God reigned not now at the present time, nor was to reign at all until this surrendry of the Kingdom by Christ our Saviour. That were injurious to the power and Majesty of Almighty God by whom all things were made; and by whom all made subject unto Christ's command: for he it is who did put all things under him, saith the Apostle. Nor must we understand it so, as it Christ delivering up the Kingdom had no more to do, but was reduced to the condition of a private Saint: that were injurious to the dignity of our Lord CHRIST JESUS. Nec sic arbitremur eum tra●iturum Deo & Patri, ut adimat sibi, as St. Austin hath it, we must not think, saith he, that he will so deliver up the Kingdom unto God the Father, as to divest himself of all Power, Majesty. Not so: His meaning is but this at most, (taking the word Kingdom in the usual and accustomed sense) that the form of governing this Kingdom shall then be altered: S●n, Hell, and Death being all subdued, as in himself before, so in all his Members; and Heaven replenished with those Saints, for whose sakes principally he received the Kingdom. And though this Exposition be both safe, and general, yet I conceive it may admit another sense, and such as do most happily avoid those difficulties, which otherwise it may seem to be subject to. What then if we should say, that by Regnum here, we are so understand only filios Regni; if by the word Kingdom in this place, St. Paul meaneth those who are called the Children of the Kingdom 
(l) Mat. 13.38. , in another place: and that by the delivering up of the Kingdom unto God the Father, we are to understand no more than the presenting of his children (Behold I and the children whom thou hast given me 
(m) Heb. 2.35. ) to the fight of God; to be received into his glories, and crowned by him with immortality. Assuredly, if I should both say it, and stand to it too, I should not think the Exposition either forced, nor new. Not forced, for Metonymies of this kind in the Book of God, and in all Classic Authors too, are exceeding obvious. For Classic Authors first, (to name two or three) we have in Tacitus, Matrimonium Principale (pessimum principalis Matrimonii instrumentum 
(n) Tacit. Hist. ) for the Prince's wife. And in the Poet Coelum, Heaven, for Coelites, the heavenly Citizens; as Coelo gratissimus amnis, a River very acceptable unto those in heaven. O Coelo dilecta domus, an house beloved of the Gods, in another Poet. Thus also in the holy Scripture, Regale Presbyterium, a Royal Priesthood, 1 Pet. 2. vers. 8. is put for a society of Royal Priests: Regnum which is the word here used, is in our English rendered Kings. Fecit nos Regnum & sacerdotes, saith the Vulgar Latin; He hath made us Kings and Priests, saith our Translation 
(o) Apoc. 1.6. , Apoc. 1. vers. 6. And more than so: in the 13. of St. Matthewes Gospel, the word Regnum is directly used by Christ our Saviour, pro filiis Regni, the Kingdom, for the sons of the Kingdom. The Kingdom of Heaven, saith he, is like a Merchant man. i e. the children of the Kingdom of Heaven are like to Merchant men seeking godly pearls, vers. 24. Use but the word so here, as in that of St. Matthew, and the delivery of the Kingdom unto God the Father, will signify no more than the presenting of the Saints, as before I said, or tendering God's adopted Sons, (which are the children of the great King and the Kingdom too) to their heavenly Father. This shows the Exposition is not forced, we are sure of that. And we have hopes to prove that it is not new; being I think as old as St. Augustine's time. For ask this question of himself, What is the meaning of this Text, Then shall he deliver up the Kingdom unto God the Father? He makes this answer, Quia justos omnes in quibus nunc regnat, etc. 
(o) August. de Trinit. l. 1. c. 7. . The meaning is, that he shall bring the righteous persons in whom he reigns as Mediator between God and man, unto the blessed Vision of Almighty God, that they may see him face to face. And in another place to the same effect, It is as much as if he should have said in other words, Cum perduxerit credentes ad contemplationem Dei & Patris 
(p) Id. ibid. , Then shall he bring the faithful to behold the face of God the Father. Which Faithful, or the body of his holy ones, he calls plainly in another place, by the name of Regnum (the word here used by the Apostle): affirming of the Saints of God, eos ita esse in Regno ejus ut ipsi etiam sint Regnum ejus 
(q) Aug. de Civit. dei. l. 20. c. 9 . They are (saith he) estated in the Kingdom of God, but so as to be his Kingdom also. But this discourse is out of season, though not out of the way. For though our Saviour shall deliver up the Kingdom unto God the Father (in what sense soever we understand it) yet shall not this be done till after the day of general Judgement, till he hath judged the quick and dead, and given to every one according to his works. Which is the last act of his Regal Office, and the subject of the following Article.    

ARTICLE VIII. Of the Eighth ARTICLE OF THE CREED Ascribed unto St. MATTHEW. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. i e. Ind venturus judicare vivos & mortous. i e. From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.  

CHAP. XV. Touching the coming of our Saviour to judgement both of quick and dead; The souls of just men not in the highest state of bliss till the day of judgement; and of the time and place and other circumstances of that action.  
WE are now come unto the last and greatest act of the Regal Office, the supreme power of judicature; and to the best part also of the Royal power, potestas vitae & mortis, the power of life and death as the Lawyers call it. All other acts of the Kingly function he executeth sitting at the right hand of God in the Heavenly places. But when he cometh to judge both the quick and the dead, his Judgement-seat shall be erected in some visible place (though still at the right hand of Almighty God) where both the wicked shall behold him, to their final confusion, and his obedient Servants find access unto him, to their endless comforts. And this is also the last and highest degree of his exaltation; the last in order, but the highest in esteem and honour. The first step or degree of his exaltation was his descent into hell, to beat the Devil at his own home, in his strongest fortress, and take possession of that part of his Kingdom: Devils as well as Men and Angels, things under the earth, as well as on the earth and above the heavens, being to bow the knee before him, and be subject to him. This was done only in the fight of the Devils, and the infernal fiends of hell; but in the next, which was his resurrection, he had both men and Angels to bear witness to it; and some raised purposely from the dead to attend him in it. The third degree or step (for he still went higher) was his ascending into heaven, performed openly in the sight of the people; and so performed, that it excelled all the triumphs which were gone before: the blessed Angels coming out to meet him, the Saints encompassing him about to wait upon him; the Devil and his Angels led in chains behind. After this comes his inthronizing at the right hand of God, the Angel● and Archangels, all the hosts of heaven, falling down before him; the Saints and Martyrs joining to make up the consort, and saying with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and strength, and wisdom, and honour, and glory, and blessing 
(a) Apocal. 4.12. & 14. ; Blessing, and honour, glory and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for evermore. The last and greatest as I said is his coming to judgement, solemnised in the sight both of men and Angels, of the unjust and righteous person, yea and the Devil and his Ministers, all which shall be attendant at that grand Assize; some to receive their several and particular sentences, and some to put the same into execution.  
In my discourse upon this Article I shall take for granted, that there shall be a day of judgement. He ill deserves the name of Christian that makes question of it. And to say truth, it is a point of so clear an evidence, that the wiser and more sober men amongst the Gentiles, though guided by no other light than that of natural reason did subscribe unto it. For as Lactantius one much versed in their books and writings, hath told us of them 
(b) Lact. l. 1. c. 18. , not only the Sibyls who may seem to have been inspired with the Spirit of Prophecy, but Hydaspes, and Mercurius surnamed Trismegistus were of that opinion: delivering, as with one assent, this most certain truth, that in the last age the godly being severed from the wicked men, with tears and groans shall lift up their hands to Jupiter, and implore his aid for their deliverance; and that Jupiter shall hear their prayers and destroy the wicked. And all these things saith he are true, and shall accordingly come to pass as they have delivered, nisi quod jovem illa facturum dicunt quae deus faciet, but that they do ascribe to jupiter, what belongs to God. Nor want there pregnant reasons which may induce a natural man, if wilfully he do not quench that light of reason which is planted in him, to be persuaded strongly of a future judgement. For granting that there is a God, and that God is just, and seeing that in this present world, such men as were endued with most moral virtues, were subject to disgrace and scorn, and many times brought to calamitous ends; and on the other side voluptuous persons who made their belly their God and their glory their shame, to live in peace and plenty, much reverenced and respected by all sorts of people: right reason could not but conclude, that certainly there must be some rewards and punishments after this life ended, which God in his eternal justice would proportion to them, according as they had deserved. And this was David's contemplation in the book of Psalms. He had observed of wicked and ungodly men, that they came unto no misfortune like other folks, neither were they plagued like other men; that they did prosper in the world, had riches in possession, and left the rest of their substance to their babes 
(c) Psal. 17.14. : but that he himself and other children of God, who cleansed their hearts and washed their hands in innocence, were not only chastened every morning, but punished also all day long. Which though at first it made him stagger in the way of Godliness, so that his feet had well-nigh slipped: yet upon further consideration he resolved it thus, that God did set them up in slippery places, but it was only to destroy them and cast them down, and that at last for all their glories they should perish, and be brought to a fearful end. The Parable of Dives and Lazarus serves for confirmation of this. Upon whose different fortunes Abraham gave this censure, Son remember that thou in thy life time enjoyedst thy good things, and Lazarus received evili: But now he is comforted, and thou art tormented 
(d) Luk. 16.25. . Some sins the Lord is pleased to punish in this present world, left else the wicked man should grow too secure, and think God's justice were asleep and observed him not: and some he leaves unpunished till the world to come, to keep the righteous soul in hope of a better day, in which he shall obtain the Crown of his well deserving. And to this purpose the good Father reasoneth very strongly. Should every sinner be punished in this present life, nihil ultimo judicio reservari putaretur 
(e) Aug. de Civ. dei. l. 1. c. 8. , etc. It would be thought that there was nothing for Christ to do at the day of judgement: And on the other side, if none, the providence and justice of Almighty God, would be called in question by each sensual man 
(f) Claudi an de Ruffini caede. , 
— Qui numina sensu  
Ambiguo, vel nulla putat, vel nescia nostri.   
And therefore it is necessary also in respect of God that there should be a day of judgement both of quick and dead; at least as to vindicating of his Divine justice, which else would suffer much in the eye of men: when they observe what we have noted from the Psalmist, with what prosperity and peace the ungodly flourish, but go not as he did into the Sanctuary to understand of God what their end should be. Add yet the Poet's contemplation on this point was both good and pious, and such as might become a right honest Christian: had he intended that of eternal punishments which he speaks of temporal. But howsoever thus he hath it 
(g) Id. ibid. . 

Saepe mihi dubiam traxit sententia mentem,  
Curarent Superi terras, an nullus inesset  
Rector, & incerto fluerent mortalia casu, etc.  
Abstulit hunc tandem Ruffini poena tumultum,  
Absolvitque Deos; jam non ad culmina rerum  
Injustos crevisse queror; tolluntur in altum,  
Vt lapsu gravore ruant.   

Oft had I been perplexed in mind, to know  
Whether the Gods took charge of things below;  
Or that uncertain chance the world did sway,  
Finding no higher ruler to obey.  
Ruffino's fall at last, to this distraction  
Gave a full end, and ample satisfaction  
To the wronged Gods. I shall no more complain  
That wicked men to great power attain;  
For now I see they are advanced on high,  
To make their ruin look more wretchedly.   Something there also is which may make us Christians not only to believe but expect this day, considering that we are told in the holy Scriptures that we shall all appear before the judgement-seat of Christ, that every man may receive according to that which he hath done in his body whether good or evil 
(h) Rom. 14.10 . The strength and efficacy of the Argument in brief is this. The bodies of us men being the servants of the soul to righteousness, or else the instruments to sin, in justice ought to be partakers of that weal and woe, which is adjudged unto the soul; and therefore to be raised at the day of judgement, that as they sinned together, or served God together, so they may share together of reward or punishment. But because many times the soul sins without the body, and many times without it doth some works of piety, which God is pleased to accept of: therefore as requisite it is that the soul separated from the body, should either suffer torment or enjoy felicity, according as it hath deserved in the sight of God, whilst yet the body sleepeth in the grave of death. And on these grounds, next to the dictates and authority of the book of God, the doctrine 
(i) Philastr. de haeres.  of the general judgement hath been built so strongly, that only some few Atheists amongst the Gentiles, and none but the wicked Sect of Manichees amongst the Christians, had ever the impudence to deny it.  
That which concerns us most as Christians, and doth especially relate to the present Article, is that this judgement shall be executed by our Saviour Christ, sitting with power at the right hand of God the Father, but in the nature and capacity of the Son of man. Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man, sitting at the right hand of the power of God, and coming in the clouds of the Air, Mat. 26.64. See the same also Mark 14.62. and Luk. 22.69. The like we have also in St. john's Gospel. The Father judgeth no man; but hath committed all judgement to the Son, Chap. 5▪ 22. What? to the Son according to his eternal generation, as the Word of God? Not so, but to the Son of man. For so it followeth in that Chapter, viz. And hath given him power also to judge, because he is the Son of man, V. 27. And this we have directly from the Lords one mouth. The Apostles also say the same. St. Peter first, God raised him up the third day and showed him openly 
(k) Act. 10.40, 42. , And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he, which is ordained of God to be judge both of quick and dead. St. Paul next. Henceforth there is laid up for me a Crown of righteousness which the Lord the righteous judge shall give me at that day 
(l) 2 Tim. 4.8. , and not to me only but to all those that love his appearing. So for St. jude, Behold the Lord shall come with thousands of his Saints to give judgement against all men, and to rebuke all that are ungodly amongst them, of all their ungodly deeds which they have committed, and of all the cruel speakings which ungodly sinners have spoken against him 
(m) Judas 14, 15. . And this he citeth out of the Prophecies of Enoch the seventh from Adam, which showeth that even the Patriarches before the flood, were thoroughly possessed with this sacred truth; and therefore not concealed from the holy Prophets which have been since the world began. That it was manifested also to the ancient Gentiles, I have no reason to believe. For though they might collect upon grounds of reason, that there should be a day of judgement in the world to come: yet that this judgement should be executed by the man CHRIST JESUS, could not in possibility be discovered to them by the light of reason; nor indeed by any other sight then by his alone, who was to be a light to lighten the Gentiles, as well as to be the glory of his people Israel. And therefore in my mind Lactantius might have spared that part of his censure upon the judgement of Hydaspes before remembered 
(n) Lactant. l. 7, c. 18. : in which he approves of his opinion concerning the last day or the day of doom, but addeth that his not ascribing this great work to the Son of God, was omitted non sine daemonum fraud, by the fraud and suggestion of the Devil. If Hermes (or Mercurius) surnamed Trismegistus, understood so much (quod tamen non dissimulavit Hermes, as it followeth after:) and that the verses by him cited from the ancient Sibyls were by them spoken and intended (as he saith they were) of CHRIST our Saviour, and of his coming unto judgement in that dreadful day: we must needs say they had a clearer Revelation of it, than any of the Prophets of the most high God; which for my part I have not confidence enough to say. For in which of all the Prophets find we such a description of Christ's coming to judgement as this which he ascribeth to one of the Sibyls 
(o) Id. ibid. c. 19 ?  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
That is to say; 
Rolling up heaven, earth's depths I shall disclose,  
Then raise the dead, the bonds of fate unloose,  
And deaths sharp sting; and next to judgement call  
Both quick and dead, judging the lives of all.  Letting this therefore pass as a thing improbable, that any of the Heathen Prophetesses should know more of Christ's coming to judgement, than was revealed to any of the holy Prophets; or else deliver it in more clear expressions than do occur in any of the Prophetical writers: we shall proceed unto the execution of this judgement by our Lord and Saviour, according to the scope of this present Article. For which although no reason was or could be given by those ancient sages, as those which lived before the coming of CHRIST, and consequently were not made acquainted with his life and actions: yet there is reason to induce a Christian unto this belief, were we not biased to it by the text of Scripture. For what could be more just in Almighty God, then to advance his Son to the seat of judgement, to the end that having been dishonoured publicly both in life and death, scorned and contemned, and brought unto a shameful end in the eye of men; he might have opportunity to show his great power and majesty in the sight of all, but specially of his barbarous and ungodly enemies? And unto this the Prophet Zachariah alludeth, saying, They shall look on me whom they have pierced 
(p) Zach. 12.10 . Which words, although St. john applieth in his holy Gospel unto the piercing of Christ's side, Chap. 19.37. yet in the Revelation he applieth it to his sitting in judgement, Behold, saith he, he cometh in the clouds, and all eyes shall see him, and they also that pierced him, Chap. 1.17. And from these words it is conceived I think not improbably, that the wounds in our Saviour's body shall then be visible to the eyes of all spectators: to the great comfort of the faithful, who do acknowledge their redemption to the blood of the Lamb; and to the astonishment and confusion of all his enemies, but most especially of them, qui vulnera ista inflixerunt 
(q) Estius in Zechar. 12. , by whose ungodly hands he was so tormented.  
Here than we have good grounds to proceed upon, both in the way of faith and reason, for the asserting of the day of general judgement. And yet somewhat further must be said to remove a difficulty, which may else disturb us in our way, before we look into the particulars of it. For possibly it may be said, that there will be but little use of a general judgement, except it be for ostentation of our Savious power: in regard that every man receives his judgement, either life or death, as soon as he is freed from his earthly tabernacle; For which there is sufficient proof in the book of God. This day (said Christ our Saviour to the penitent thief) shalt thou be with me in paradise 
(r) Luk. 23.43. . As plain is that of the Apostle, It is appointed unto men once to die, and after death the judgement 
(s) Heb. 9.27. . The same we find exemplifyed in the rich man and Lazarus: the soul of the one as soon as dead, being carried into Abraham's bosom 
(t) Luk. 26.22, 23. ; the other being plunged in unquenchable flames. If so, as so it is most certain, what use can be conceived of a general judgement, when all particular persons have already received their sentence; what further punishments or glory can be added to them, than Paradise to God's Saints and servants, and the unquenchable flames of hell for impenitent sinners. Which difficulty though removed in some part before, as to the vindicating of the justice of Almighty God, and the participation of the body in that bliss or misery, which the soul presently is adjudged to on the separation, and finally the manifesting of Christ's power and glory in the sight of his enemies: shall now be also cleared as to that part thereof, which seems to place the soul in the height of happiness, as soon as separate from the body, or in the depth of anguish and disconsolation. And first, that the souls of just and righteous persons are in the hands of God, in Paradise, in Abraham's bosom, yea in the very heavens themselves, I shall easily grant. But that they are in the same place, or in the same estate and degree of glory, to which they shall be preferred by Christ in the day of judgement, I neither have seen text nor reason, which could yet persuade me. Certain I am, the Scripture seems to me to be quite against it, the current of antiquity, and not a few Moderns of good note and eminency to incline very strongly to the other side. For Scriptures first, St. Paul doth speak indeed of a Crown of righteousness, to be given to him, and to all those that love the appearing of Christ 
(u) 2 Tim. 4.8. , but not to be given them till that day, i. e. the day of his appearing. St. Peter next informeth of an incorruptible inheritance reserved for us in the heavens; and more than so, prepared already 
(x) 1 Pet. 1.4, 5. , but not to be showed till the last time. In the last place we have St. john acquainting us with the condition of the Saints, as in matter of fact, where he telleth us that the souls of the Martyrs under the Altar 
(y) Apocal. 6.10, 11. , where they were willed to rest themselves, till the number of their fellow servants was accomplished. And though we grant the souls of righteous men departed are in heaven itself; yet doth it not follow by any good consequence, that therefore they are in the highest Heaven, where God himself refideth in most perfect majesty. The name of Heaven is variously used in holy Scriptures. First for the Air, as where we find mention of the birds of heaven, Mat. 26. and the clouds of heaven, Mark. 14. Next for the Firmament above, in which the Lord hath placed those most glorious lights, which frequently are called the Stars of heaven, as Gen. 20. Then for that place, which St. Paul calleth in one text by the name of the third heaven, 2 Cor. 12.2. and in another place shortly after by the name of Paradise, vers. 4. which is conceived to be the habitations of the Angels, their proper habitation, as St. jude calleth it, vers. 6. Into this place the soul of Lazarus was carried, as to Abraham's bosom; to this our Saviour promised to bring the soul of the penitent thief: Hitherto Enoch and Eliah were translated by God, and St. Paul taken up in an heavenly rapture. And to this place, or to some one or many of those heavenly mansion, (for in my Father's house there are many mansions 
(a) Joh. 14.2. , said our Lord and Saviour) the souls of righteous men are carried on the wings of Angels; there to abide, till they are called upon to meet their bodies in day of day of judgement. And last of all it ●ignifyeth the highest heaven, to which Christ our Saviour is ascended, and sitteth at the right hand of God in most perfect glory: Of which St. Paul telleth us, that he was made higher than the heavens, Heb. 7. and that he did ascend above all the heavens, Ephes. 4. This is the seat or Palace of Almighty God, called as by way of excellency the heaven of heavens, where his divine glory and majesty is most plainly manifested, and therefore called by the Prophet, the habitation of his holiness and of his glory 
(b) Isa. 63.13. . So then, the souls of righteous men deceased may be in Paradise, in the third heaven, in Abraham's bosom: and yet not be admitted to the highest heaven wherein God reigns in perfect glory, till Christ shall come again to judgement, and take them for ever to himself into possession and participation of his heavenly Kingdom.  
That in this sense the Fathers understand the Scriptures, which mention the estate of the Saints departed, will best be seen by looking over their own words, according as they lived in the several Churches. First for the Eastern Cherches, justin Martyr telleth us, that the the souls of the righteous are carried to Paradise, where they enjoy the company of Angels, Archangels, and the vision of Christ our Saviour; and are kept in places fit for them till the day of the resurrection and compensation 
(c) Iust. Mart. qu. 75. . Next Origen. The Saints (saith he) departing hence, do not presently obtain the full reward of their labours, but they expect us though staying and slacking 
(d) Origen in Levit. hom. 7. ; For they have not perfect joy, so long as they grieve at our Errors, and lament our sins. Then chrysostom more than once or twice, Though the soul were a thousand times immortal as it is, yet shall she not enjoy those admirable good things without the body 
(e) Chrys. in 1. ad Cor. hom. 39 . And if the body rise not again, the soul remaineth uncrowned without heavenly bliss 
(f) Id. ibid. . Theodoret lived in the same times, and was of the same opinion also, saying, The Saints have not yet received their Crowns; for the God of all expecteth the conflict of others, that the race being ended, he may at once pronounce all that overcome to be Conquerors, and reward them together 
(g) Theod. in Heb. 11. . Finally not to look so low as Oecumenius and Theophylact, who say almost as much as Theodoret did; we have at once the judgement of many of the Fathers, delivered by Andreas Caesariensis in a very few words: It is, saith he, the judgement of many godly Fathers, that every good man (after this life) hath a place fit for him, by which he may conjecture at the glory which is prepared 
(h) And. Caesar. in Apocal. c. 18. . Look we now on the Western Churches, and first we have Irenaeus B. of Lions in France affirming positively thus, Manifestum est, etc. It is manifest that the souls of Christ's disciples shall go to an invisible place appointed them by God, and there shall remain unto the resurrection; and after receiving their bodies, and rising perfectly, that is corporally as Christ did rise, shall so come to the Vision or sight of God 
(i) Iren. l. 5. c 31. . Tertullian next, It is, saith he, apparent to any wise man, that there is a place determined which is Abraham's bosom, for the receiving of the souls of his sons: which region, I mean Abraham's bosom, though it be not heavenly (but Tertullian was out in that) sublimior tamen inferis, yet being higher than the inferi, or places below, shall give comfort to the souls of the righteous, until the resurrection and the end of all things bring the full reward 
(k) Tertull. ad. vers. Martion. l. 4 . So Hilary B. of Poitiers, The day of judgement is the day of everlasting happiness or punishment; till which time death hath every one under his dominion, whilst either Abraham's bosom, or the house of torments reserveth every man to judgement 
(l) Hilar. in Psal. 2. . St. Ambrose to the same effect, till the fullness of time come, the souls expect their due reward; for some of which pain, for others glory is provided 
(m) Ambros. de bon● mortis. c. 10 . Next him St. Augustine his convert, After this short life thou shalt not as yet be where the Saints shall be, to whom it shall be said (in the day of judgement) Come ye blessed of my father, etc. Thou shalt not be there as yet, who knoweth not that; but there thou shalt be where poor Lazarus was seen a far off by the proud richman 
(n) August. in. Psal. 36. . In that rest shalt thou securely expect the day of judgement, in which thou shalt receive thy body, and be changed, and be made equal with the Angels. St. Bernard thus; you perceive that there be three states of the soul, the first in this corruptible body, the second without the body, the third in perfect blessedness. The first in the Tabernacles, the second in the Courts, the third in the house of God 
(o) Bern. in festo Omn. S. Serm. 3. ; into which most blessed house of God, the souls (of the Saints) shall not enter without us, nor without their own bodies.  
I had not named St. Bernard amongst those Ancients, but only to the end that it might be seen that this was generally the doctrine of the Western Church, as to this particular; until the invocation of the Saints departed became first to be put in practice, and afterwards to be defended and imposed as good Catholic Doctrine. For they saw well, that unless it were received for an Orthodox truth that the Saints departed were admitted presently into the beatifical vision of Almighty God; and in him see, as in a Mirror, what things soever could be done or said on the earth beneath: it were in vain to make unto them either prayers or vows, not being yet estated in their own full glories, and consequently not admitted to the presence of God. And on the very same reasons, for which the Church of Rome doth admit the Saints to enjoy the blessed vision of Almighty God in the heaven of glories; did Calvin labour to decry the received opinion in that point: though by long tract of time, engendering prejudice and prepossession in the hearts of men against any contrary position, it was become the general tenet of the Protestant Schools. For well he knew, that if that doctrine could be rooted out of the minds of men, by which the Saints were brought (though before their time) into an habitation in the highest heavens: that of the invocation of the Saints departed, which depends upon it, must of necessity perish with it. But whatsoever moved him to opine so of it (for I am confident it was not any love to the ancient Fathers) certain it is that he hath freely declared his opinion in it, in several places of his writings. In that entitled Psychopannychia, he doth thus express it, The souls of the Saints after death, be in peace, saith he, because they are escaped from the power of the enemy; but shall not reign with Christ their King, until the heavenly Jerusalem shall be advanced to her glory, and the true Solomon the King of peace shall sit on high on his tribunal 
(p) Calv. Psychopannychia. . And this he doth not only say, and leave the proof thereof to his ipse dixit, as if that were enough to carry it over all the world: but citys Tertullian, chrysostom, Augustine, Bernard, (some of whose words we saw before) to confirm the point. But seeing that tract of his hath been called in question, as if it did incline too much towards the Anabaptists: we will next look upon his book of Institutions, where we find him saying, That since the Scripture every where biddeth us to depend upon the expectation of Christ's coming, and deferreth the Crown of glory till that time, we are to be content with the bounds that God hath appointed us; viz. that the souls of the godly having ended their warfare depart unto an happy rest, where with a blessed joy they look for the fruition of the promised glory; and that so all things shall stand suspended until Christ appear 
(q) Id. in Instit. l. 3. c. 26. §. 6. . The same he also intimateth in another place, where he resolveth, That not only the Fathers under the Law, but even the holy men of God since the death of Christ, are but in profectu, in progress, as it were, to that perfect happiness, which is to be conferred upon them in the day of doom; that in the mean time they abide in atriis in the out-courts of Heaven, and there expect the consummation of their beatitude. And finally, none but our Saviour Christ, saith he, hath entered into the heavenly Sanctuary▪ where to the end of all the world, Solus populi eminus in atrio residentis vota ad deum defert, he alone represents to God the desires of his people, sitting a far off in the outward Courts 
(r) Ibid. c. 20. §. 10. . I know that Bellarmine doth quarrel at these passages of calvin's, and I cannot blame him. He, and the common interest of the Church of Rome, were so engaged in the defence of the other opinion, without which that of the invocation of Saints must needs fall to the ground, that it concerned them all to calumniate Calvin, as the broacher of new Doctrines in the Church of Christ, though in this point they find him countenanced by most ancient writers. Neither doth Calvin stand alone in this opinion▪ being seconded, though not in so express terms as himself delivereth it, by Bucer, Bullinger, Martyr, Musculus, and some others also. And wonder 'tis, not that he was followed by so many, but by so few prime men of the reformation, to whom his name and authority were exceeding dear.  
And if the case stand so with the Saints above, no question but it standeth so too with the souls below. For contrariorum par est ratio, as the old rule is. And to the truth we have not only the testimony of the holy Scriptures, saying expressly that God reserveth the unjust unto the day of judgement to be punished, 2 Pet. 2. but of so many of the Fathers as do touch upon it, as may appear by that of Hilary and Ambrose before delivered. By which the other passages of holy writ, as jude v. 6. Mat. 8.29. and Rom. 2.5. it is plain and manifest that the torments of the damned and the Devils too, which are inflicted on them for the present time, are far less than the vengeance of eternal and external fire reserved until the day of judgement, and then augmented upon all the reprobate both men and Angels. For grant the most which had been said by any of the Ancients as to this particular, and we shall find that it amounteth to no more than this, that the souls of wicked men departed, are presently made to understand by the righteous judge, the sentence due unto their sins, and what they are to look for at the day of doom. Postquam anima de corpore est egressa, subito judicium Christi de salute cognoscit 
(t) August. de Anim. & ejus Orig. l. 1.4. , as St. Augustine hath it. Which being once made known to the sinful soul, standing before the throne of Christ, in the sight of heaven, she is forthwith hurried by the evil angels to the mansions of hell, where she is kept as in a Prison, under chains, and darkness, until the judgement of the great and terrible day, jude v. 6. And so we are to understand those words of St. Cyril, saying, Anima damnata continuo invaditur a daemonibus, qui eam crudelissime rapiunt & ad infernum deducunt 
(u) Cyril. in Orat. de exitu Anim. ; unless we rather choose to refer the same unto the executing of the sentence of their condemnation at the day of doom, as perhaps some may. But howsoever they be hurried by the Devils into the darkness of hell, as to the place wherein they are to be secured till the day of judgement: yet that they feel that misery and extremity of torments, which after the last day shall be laid upon them, neither they nor any of the Ancients have delivered to us. For of that day it is, not the day of their death, of which Scriptures do report such terrible things, saying that the heavens shall vanish away, and be rolled up like a scroll, that all the mountains and the hills shall be moved out of their places 
(x) Apocal. 6.15, 16, 17. ; and that the Kings of the earth and the mighty men, etc. that is to say, the wicked of what sort soever, shall say unto the hills and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb, for the great day of his wrath is come, and who is able to endure it?  
And certainly the terrors of that day must needs be great, incomprehensible, not only to the guilty conscience, but even unto the righteous souls, who joyfully expect the coming of their Lord and Saviour. For in that day, the Sun shall be darkened, and the Moon shall not give her light, the Stars shall fall from heaven, and all the powers thereof shall be shaken 
(y) Mat. 24 29, 30, etc. . And the sign of the Son of man shall appear in heaven, and then shall all the kindred of the earth mourn, and they shall see the son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with great power and glory. And he shall send his Angels with the great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together the Elect from the four winds, from one end of the heaven to the other. So far we have described the fashion of that dreadful day, from the Lords one mouth. St. Luke unto these former terrors doth add the roaring of the Sea and the waters also. 
(z) Luk. 21.25.  St. Peter, that the elements shall melt with fervent heat, and that the earth also and the works thereof shall be utterly burned 
(a) ● Pet. 3.10. . In this confusion of the world, and general dissolution of the works of nature, the Lord himself shall descend from heaven in a shout, and in the voice of an Archangel, and the sound of a trump 
(b) 1 Thess. 4.16, 17. ; and the dead in Christ shall rise first. Then we which live and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, (for though we shall not all die, we shall all be changed, 1 Cor. 15.51.) and all together shall meet the Lord Jesus in the Air. The meaning is, that at the sounding of this last trump, the very same bodies which the Elect had before, though mangled by tyrants, devoured by wild beasts or burnt to ashes, shall be raised again; and being united to their souls shall be made alive, and rise out of the bed of sleep like so many Joseph's out of prison, or daniel's from the den of the roaring Lions. But as for such of the Elect, who at that sudden coming of our Lord shall be found alive, the fire which burneth up the corruptions of the world and the works thereof, shall in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, (as St. Paul telleth us 
(c) 1 Cor. 15. ) overtake them, as it findeth them, at their several businesses; and burning up the dross and corruption of their natural bodies, of mortal shall make them to be immortal: which change shall be to them in the stead of death. In this sort shall they meet the Lord coming in the clouds of the Air: where the Tribunal or judgement-seat of Christ shall be erected; that the ungodly man, the impenitent sinner, who is not capable of coming into heaven for so much as a moment (for no unclean thing, or any one that worketh abomination shall find entrance there, Apocal. 21.27.) may stand before his throne, to receive his sentence. So witnesseth St. john in the Revelation: And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face fled away both the earth and the heaven 
(d) Apoc. 20.11 etc. . And I saw the dead both small and great stand before God, and the books were opened, and another book was opened which is the book of life; and the dead were judged of those things which were written in the books according to their deeds. And the Sea gave up the dead which were in her, and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them, and they were judged every man according to his works; And whosoever was not found written in the book of life, was cast into the lake of fire. To the same purpose and effect doth Christ himself describe this day and the manner of his coming unto judgement, in St. Matthews Gospel: that which St. john calleth the white throne, being by Christ our Saviour called the throne of his majesty, Mat. 25.31. At which time all the nations of the world being gathered together before him, the good being separated from the bad, and a brief repetition of their works being made unto them 
(e) Man. 25.34 etc. : the righteous shall be called into the Kingdom prepared for them from the foundations of the world; the wicked man be doomed to fire everlasting prepared for the Devil and his Angels. For though Lactantius seem to think, that the wicked shall not rise in the day of judgement, and doth it, as he sayeth himself, literis sacris contestantibus 
(f) Lact. l. 7. c. 20. , on the authority and warrant of the holy Scriptures: yet certainly the Scripture, as we see by these two last passages, is against him in it. That which occasioned his mistake (if I guess aright) was those words of David, viz. Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgement 
(g) Psal. 1.5. : which is not to be meant of their not appearing, but of their not daring to stand to their trial, but shrinking under the heavy burden of their sins and wickednesses.  
Thus have I made a brief but a full description of Christ's coming to judge both the quick and the dead; according as it is laid down in the book of God. The substance of it we have there delivered in so plain a way, that every one that reads it understands it also; unless he wilfully mistake and turn all to Allegories. But for the Circumstances of this great and most glorious action, that is to say, the method and the manner of it, the time and place, and other things co-incident to those particulars: in those I shall crave leave to enlarge myself a little further, as well for my own satisfaction, as the content of the reader.  
And first beginning with the time, there is but little, I confess, to be said of that. Our Saviour telleth us in plain terms, that of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no not the Angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father 
(h) Mar. 13.32. . And yet as plain as these words are, they have given great matter of dispute in the Christian Church: especially that part of them which concerns the Son, and his not knowing when that day and that hour should come. The Arians hereupon concluded against CHRIST'S divinity, as being ignorant of some things which the Father knew. But unto this, the Fathers of that age answered very rightly, that Christ speaks not of himself as God, or as the Word both made and manifested in the flesh, but as he was the Son of man, to whom the Father had not pleased to communicate the knowledge of so great a mystery. And of this mind were Athanasius Serm. 4. cont. Arium. Ambrose l. 5. de fide c. 8. Nazianzen Orat. 4. de Theolog. Theodoret Anathem. 4. cont. Cyrill. Cyril of Alexand●. l. 9 Thesaur. c. 4. the Author of the imperfect work on St. Matthews Gospel ascribed to chrysostom. Which though, no doubt, it was the most ready and most satisfactory answer which could be given unto the objection: yet when the learning of the Schools came to be in credit, this answer was conceived to be derogatory to the honour of CHRIST; and many acquaint devises found to avoid the Argument, some of them so derogatory to the honour of Christ, that I think a greater scandal could not possibly be laid upon him. And such I take to be that of Estius, (though I think him to be one of the modestest men that ever came out of the School of Ignatius Loyala) who telleth us that Christ is said to be ignorant of that day and hour, quia non sic eum didicerat a Patre ut illum ulterius hominibus m●nifestare deberet 
(i) Estius in Marc. 13.32. , because he had not so learned it of his Father, as that he ought to make it known to us men. More briefly thus, Christ saith, he doth doth not know of that day, and that hour, ut videlicet nobis notum faciat, he doth not know it so, as to tell it us. Which is in plain terms neither better nor worse, then to make Christ the author of equivocation, so much in use amongst the jesuits. For though our Saviour was not bound, nor did think it expedient, to communicate all those things unto his Disciples, which had been imparted to him by his heavenly Father: yet to put such a speech in the mouth of Christ, viz. I know it not, that is to say, I do not know it so, as to tell it you, is such a cunning piece of jesuitism, that it is hardly to be matched in all their writings. And therefore leaving them to their strange devises, we will look back again upon the answer of the Ancient Fathers: which though both right and satisfactory, as before I said; yet was it so deserted in the age next following, that the Themistiani in the time of the Emperor Mauritius were accounted heretics, and nicknamed commonly Agn●etae 
(k) Damascen in lib. de ●aeres. Prateol. in Agnoetis. , because they taught that Christ considered in his humane nature, was ignorant of that day and hour of his own coming to judgement. And possible enough it is they might still pass for heretics (did they live amongst us) if they maintained this universally of Christ's humane nature, as if he neither did know it, nor were capable of it; and not with reference to the time in which he spoke it: there being many things communicated to him after his resurrection, which before were not known unto him. And therefore I, for my part, shall subscribe unto that of Origen, who telleth us, that when our Saviour spoke these words he was indeed ignorant of the day of judgement; post resurrectionem vero seivisse, quod tun● Rex & Judex a Patre constitutus sit 
(i) Orig. in Mat. Tract. 30. , but that he knew it after his Resurrection, because he was then made by God both our King and judge.  
But whether Christ did know of that day or not, seems not much material to some men, who because they would be wiser than Christ our Saviour, have marked us out the precise time of his coming to judgement. And some there be, who think they do not trespass at all upon God's prerogative (to whom it only doth belong to know the times and the seasons, Act. 1.7.) if they content themselves with a certain year, and do not look so narrowly into it as to name the day. Of the first sort was a Dutch Priest, in the parts near Noremburg, who being skilful in Arithmetical calculations, concluded out of the numerical letters, of this prediction in the Gospel, videbunt in quem pupugerunt, joh. 19.38. that the world should end Ann. 1562. And having fooled himself in that, he presumed so far as to name the very day, nay the hour itself, in which the world should end, and Christ come to judgement: so far prevailing on his Parish that they gave belief to his prediction, and at the day and hour appointed met all together in the Chapel or Parish Church to hear their Prophet preach, and expect Christ's coming 
(k) Camerar. Medit. histor. c. 41. . It were pity to leave the story so, and therefore I will tell the success thereof, which in brief is this, No sooner were the people assembled together, but there fell a great storm with thunder and lightning, and that in such a violent and fearful manner, that they looked every minute for the Lords appearing. But the day waxing fair again, and no Saviour coming, the people finding how they had been abused, fall on the Priest and had doubtless slain him in the place if some of the more moderate men had not stayed their fury, and helped the silly Prophet to get out of their fingers. Somewhat like this of, Camerarius, we find in Espencaeus also in his Comment on the 3. Chap. of the 2. of Tim. touching the Hutites, a by-branch of the sect of Anabaptists. Of the next sort Alstedius a late famous writer, and Professor of Herborn in high Germany hath presumed so far, as to define the year of Christ's coming to judge both the quick and the dead: which after his account shall be in the year of CHRIST 3694. 
(l) Alsted. Diatribe de mille annis Apocalyptitis.  (The best is he takes time enough not to be disproved) For being of opinion (as 'tis plain he is) that there shall be a corporal resurrection of the Saints and Martyrs, at least a thousand years before the general resurrection of all flesh, during which time they shall enjoy all possible felicity that the world can give, and fixing the beginning of those thousand years, in Ann. 2694. it must needs follow thereupon, that the day of the general resurrection, and of Christ's coming to judgement, must be in the year 3694. as before was said. But before him Napeir a Scot, one of the Ancestors of the now right noble Lord of Marchiston, adventured on the like attempt, although he differed very much in his computation. For publishing a Commentary on the Revelation, Ann. 159●. he will defer the end of the world no longer then to ninety two years after that publication; which falls into the year 1685. Which though it comes two thousand years before that of Alsted, yet was it put off long enough to save his credit; the good man being like to die long before that time. Whereupon one of our own Countrymen wrote this following Epigram 
(m) Owen. Epigr. .  
Nonaginta duos durabit mundus in Annos,  
Mundus ad arbitrium si stat obitque tuum.  
Cur mundi finem propiorem non facis? ut ne  
Ante obitum mendax arguerere? Sapis.  
Which I find thus Englished to my hand, 
Ninety two years the World as yet shall stand,  
If it do stand or fall by your command.  
But say, why placed you not the world's end nigher?  
Lest ere you died you might be found a liar.  Add unto this a pleasant jest which King james put upon the Author of the book aforesaid (for such adventurers cannot be too much exposed to the public scorn) and in brief is this, The Gentleman holding lands of the Crown of Scotland, petitioned the King to have a longer term granted in his estate. The King demanded of him how long time he desired to have added to it. To which when he had answered five hundred years, God a my soul, replied the King, that is four hundred years more than the world shall last, and I conceive you do not mean to hold my Land in the world to come. And so dismissed him for that time, although he after gratifyed him in his request, having thus made him sensible of his own absurdities.  
But leaving these Knights errand to seek new adventures, we will next look unto the place appointed for this general Sessions; in which we have some light of Scripture, and probabilities of reason to direct our search. This by some very learned men is supposed to be in the Air, over the valley of jehosaphat, which is near mount Olivet, and both of them Eastward of Jerusalem. And this they do upon these grounds. For first they say, the holy Scriptures seem to say it in as plain words as may be. For thus saith God the Lord Jehovah, I will gather all nations into the valley of Jehosaphat, and plead with them there. 'Cause thy mighty ones to come down, O Lord 
(m) Joel. 2.2, 12. ; Let the heathen be wakened and come upon the valley of Jehosaphat; for there will I sit to judge all the heathen round about. Besides the name of jehosaphat doth signify as much, as The Lord will judge. And in this valley did God give jehosaphat a signal victory over the Ammonites, Moabites, and the inhabitants of Mount Seir 
(n) 2 Chron. 20.29. ; which was a type or figure of that final victory, which Christ the supreme judge shall give his Elect overall their enemies, in the last day, and in that very place, as the jewish Doctors do expound it. That of the Prophet Zechariah, And his feet shall stand in that day on the Mount of Olives 
(l) Zech. 14.4. , which is before Jerusalem to the East, etc. though formerly applied by us unto Christ's Ascension, may be accommodated also to his coming to judge the world: The rather in regard it was said by the holy Angel unto his Disciples, This same Jesus which is taken up from you into Heaven 
(q) Act. 1.11. , (being then upon the mount of Olives) shall so come in like manner as you have seen him go hence. Which possibly may as well be meant of the place, as of other the circumstances of his coming: and therefore by Aquinas and all the rest of the old Schoolmen except Lombard and Alexander of Hales, is made to be the second reason which they build upon, for nominating this valley (or rather some place over it in the Air) to be the place appointed for the future judgement. The third reason they take from a passage in the Prophet Ezekiel compared with Christ's own words in his holy Gospel. The Prophet tells us of Jerusalem, that it is placed in medio Gentium, in the very midst of the world: and so accordingly it is seated by some Cosmographers. And Christ hath told us of the Angels, that they shall gather together the Elect from the four winds, from one end of Heaven unto the other 
(r) Matth. 24.31. . If then the Termini a quibus be the four parts of the world, and Jerusalem be seated in the midst of the earth, as they say it is: the terminus ad quem must be Jerusalem or some place near it; (and such is this Valley of jehosophat) or else some Angels must be thought to be of a more quick dispatch than others, which were ridiculous to imagine. But that which is of greatest moment, is that our Lord and Saviour for ever blessed, was crucified and put to open shame very near that place: Mount Calvary, and the Valley of jehosaphat being not far asunder, if not close together, and conterminous. And what can be more probable, (for they propose not these proofs for Demonstrations) then that where Christ was put unto public shame, he should again receive a more public honour: and that where he himself was condemned and punished with so much malice and injustice; he should appear to judge the world with such truth and equity? These are the reasons brought to make good this Tenet, which as I cannot easily grant to be convincing; so I am far from saying any thing in reproof of that, which hath such handsome probabilities to gain credit to it.  
And now I am fallen upon these points, I will adventure on another, though more nice than necessary. At least it may be so accounted, and I pass not for it. Quilibet abundet in suo sensu. Let every man enjoy that liberty (I mean in matters of this nature) which I take myself. We said that Jerusalem was seated in the midst of the earth, and thereupon is called by some Geographers, Vmbilicus terrae; and that aswell Mount Olivet, as the Valley of jehosaphat, did both stand Eastward of that City. From hence it is by some inferred, and their illation backed by no mean authority, that Christ our Saviour did ascend up into the East part of Heaven, (I mean that part of Heaven which answereth to the Equinoctial East upon the Earth); that in that part of Heaven, he sitteth at the right hand of the Throne of Almighty God; and from the same shall also come in the day of Judgement. The use that may be made out of this illation, shall be interwoven in the file of this discourse; and altogether left unto the judgement of the Christian Reader. That he ascended up into the Eastern part of Heaven, hath been a thing affirmed by many of the Ancients, and by several Churches, not without some fair hints from the Scripture also. Sing unto God ye Kingdoms of the earth, etc. 
(s) Psal. 6●. 32.  saith the Royal Psalmist, To him that rideth on the Heavens as it were upon an horse, said our old Translation; to him that rideth on the Heaven of Heavens from the beginning, as our new would have it. But in the Arabic it runs thus, Sing unto the Lord that rideth on the Heaven of Heavens in the Eastern part. And so the Septuagint, that rideth on the Heavens, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, towards the East. This Origen, who very well understood the Eastern languages, applieth to CHRIST, utpote a mortuis post passionem resurgens, & in Coelum post Resurrectionem ad orientem ascendens, 
(t) Orig. in locum.  i. e. who rose from the dead after his passion, and ascended up into Heaven towards the East after his Resurrection. And so the Aethiopick reads it also, viz. Who ascended up into the Heaven of Heavens in the East. Thus Damascen affirms expressly, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that when he was received into Heaven, he was carried up Eastward. And unto this, that of the Prophet Ezekiel may seem to allude, where he saith that the glory of the God of Israel, (Remember who it is which is called in Scripture, the Glory of his people Israel, Luk. 2.) passed through the Eastern gate 
(x) Eezk. 44.2. , Therefore that gate was shut up, and might not be opened but to the Prince. That being thus ascended into Heaven above, he sitteth in that part thereof at the right hand of God, must needs be granted, if God be most conspicuously seated in that part himself. And to prove this, we find this in the Apostolical constitutions ascribed to Clemens, (take notice by the way of the Antiquity of the custom of turning towards the East in our public prayers, so generally received amongst us) who describing the Order of Divine service then used in the Church concludes it thus, Then rising up and turning towards the East, Let them pray to God, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(y) Clement. Constit. Apost. ●l. 2. c. 61. , who sitteth upon the Heaven of Heavens in the Eastern part. To this agreeth that of the Prophet Baruch, saying, Look about thee O Jerusalem towards the East, and behold the joy that cometh unto thee from God 
(z) Bar. 4.36. . Towards the East, that is to say, saith Olympiodorus an old Christian writer, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(a) Olympiodor. , towards JESUS CHRIST our Lord the Sun of righteousness. And this way also looketh that part of the old Tradition, derived as Irenaeus telleth us, (who lived near those times) ab Apostolorum Discipulis, from those which heard it of the Apostles; that is to say, that the receptacle of the just and perfect men is a certain Paradise in the Eastern part of the third Heaven. An argument that the glory of God is most conspicuous in that part also of the Heaven of Heavens, the proper mansion of the Highest, as before was shown. Finally, that from the Eastern part of Heaven he shall make his last and greatest appearance at this day of judgement; although it followeth upon that which is said already, hath much stronger evidence. An Arabic Author 
(b) Cited by Mr. Gregory, p. 88  writing on the duties of Christian Religion, and particularly of that Prayer, directeth us to turn our faces when we pray to the Eastern Coast, because that is the Coast concerning which Christ said (unto whom be glory) that he would appear from thence at his second coming. To the same purpose the Arabic Code hath a Canon saying, When ye pray, turn yourselves towards the East; For so the words of our Lord import, who foretold that his return from Heaven at the later day should be like the Lightning, which glittering from the East flasheth into the West. His meaning is, that we should expect his coming from the East. john Damascen to the same effect, thus, For as the lightning cometh out of the East and shineth even unto the West, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, so also shall be the coming of the Son of man; in which regard we worship him towards the East, as expecting him from thence. And this saith he 
(c) Damascen. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is an unwritten tradition delivered to us from the very Apostles. Take for a close, this of an old Confession of the Eastern Church, viz. We pray towards the East, for that our Lord Christ when he ascended into heaven went up that way, and there sitteth in the heaven of Heavens above the East. And in very deed we make no doubt, but that our Lord the Christ as respecting his humane nature, hath his seat in the Eastern part of the Heaven of Heavens, and sitteth with his face turned towards this world. To pray therefore or worship towards the East, is to pray and worship towards our Saviour. Nor is this only the Tradition of the Eastern and Southern Churches, as by the forecited Authors it may seem to be. We had it also in the West. For Paulus de Palacios a Spanish writer, makes it the general Tenet of all Christian people, quoth in Oriente humanitas Christi-sedeat, that Christ in reference to his humane nature, sitteth in the Eastern part of Heaven; and that he is to come from thence, where now he sitteth. And in an old Festival in this Church of England, the Priest used thus upon the Wake days, or Feasts of Dedication, to exhort the people; viz. Let us think that Christ died in the Este, and therefore let us pray besely into the Este, that we may be of the number that he died for. Also let us think that he shall come out of the Este unto the Doom. Wherefore let us pray heartily to him and besely that we may have grace of contrition in our hearts of our misdeeds, with shrift and satisfaction, that we may stand that day on the right hand of our Lord JESV CHRIST. And so much for this Eastern passage, for which I am principally beholding to that learned piece of Mr. Gregory late of Christ's Church in Oxon: whom as I much esteemed when he was alive, so have I made this free acknowledgement to the honour of his memory, now he is deceased.  
Having thus took some pains concerning the time and place of this great action; let us next proceed unto the manner, from thence unto the method of it, and so make an end. And in the manner of his coming there are specially th●se three things to he considered, viz. the sign of the Son of man, the sound of the Trumpet, and the Ministry of the blessed Angels: in all of which we shall find something worth our Observation. Touching the sign of the Son of man, which our Saviour speaks of, as of a certain note and token of his coming to judgement: it stands thus in Scripture; Then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in Heaven, and then shall all the tribes of the Earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the Clouds of Heaven, with power and great glory, Mat. 24.30. This sign then, whatsoever it is, is the prodromos or forerunner of Christ's coming to judgement, of his second coming, as was the Star which shined in the East of his birth or first coming into the world. And this to make the Parallel more full and pertinent, shall appear visibly in the East also, if the Authors whom I have consulted, do not much mistake it. If you would know what sign this is; I answer that it is the sign of the Cross: a sign like that which Christ vouchsafed to show from Heaven to the famous Constantine. Of whom Eusebius hath reported, from his own mouth too, that being embarked in a war against Maxentius, and much perplexed in mind about that affair, there showed itself unto him in an afternoon the form of a Cross figured in the Air, and therein these words written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is to say, in this sign thou shalt overcome 
(d) Euseb. de vita. Const. l. 1.22. . He adds, that after that Christ appeared to him in his sleep, holding forth the very like sign unto him, bidding him cause the like to be framed or fashioned in the Standard-Royal, and it should give him victory over all his enemies. Which apparition of the Cross, or sign of the Son of man in the time of Constantine, was a forerunner as it were of that petit Sessions, which Christ at that time held against the cruel Persecutors of his Church and people, Diocletian, Maximinus, Maximianus, Licinius, and the aforesaid Maxentius, all which in very little time were brought to most shameful ends. And that the sign of the Son of man, which our Saviour speaks of as the forerunner of the great and general Sessions, shall be no other than the sign of the Cross shining in the Air; hath the approved authority of the Ancient Fathers, and the consent and testimony of the Western Church, and of the Aethhiopic also. For if you ask St. Hierom what this sign shall be; his answer is, Signum hic Crucis intelligimus 
(e) Hieronym. in Matth. 24. , that it was to be understood of the sign of the Cross. St. Augustine also saith the same, Quid est signum Christi, nisi crux Christi 
(f) August. Homil. 118. in joh. , what is the sign of Christ, (or the Son of man) but the sign of the Cross? Prudentius a Christian Poet of the Primitive times in an Hymn of his saith of this sign, judaea tunc signum crucis experta 
(g) Prudent. de natali Chri. , that then the jews shall have experience of the sign of the Cross. Our venerable Bede is of the same mind in this, with the other Fathers 
(h) Beda in 24. cap. Matth. 24. . Nor is it marvel that he was, for it was grown by this time the received opinion of the Western Church, as appears plainly by that Anthem in her public Rituals, viz. Hoc signum Crucis erit in Coelo, etc. This sign of the Cross shall be seen in Heaven at Christ's coming to judgement. So also for the Eastern Churches, that it shall be the sign of the Cross S. Chrysostom affirms expressly, saying withal, that the light or lustre of it shall be so glorious, that it shall darken and obscure the Sun, Moon, and Stars 
(i) Chrysost. in Mat. 24. . Euthymius and Theophylact say as much for the Greek Churches; and so doth Ephrem Syrus for the Syrian also. The Aethiopian Church is so peremptory in it, that it it is put into the Articles of their Creed, as their Zaba cited by Mr. Gregory doth affirm for certain. And finally, that it shall appear in the East, is with no less certainty affirmed by Hippolytus Martyr, a Bishop of the Primitive Ages, whose words are these; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(k) Hyposa. , i e. For a sign of the Cross shall rise up in the East, and shine from East to West more gloriously than the Sun itself, to give notice to the world that the judge is coming. And to say truth, there may be very good reason for this old Tradition of the Cross. For what can be more honourable to our Lord and Saviour, or more full of terror to his enemies, then that the Cross of Christ which they counted foolishness 
(l) 1 Cor. 1.23. , and more than so, esteemed the greatest obloquy and reproach of the Christian faith: should at that day be made the Herald to proclaim his coming, and call all Nations of the world to appear before him? No wonder if the Tribes of the Earth did mourn, when that so hated sign did appear in Heaven, to call them to receive the sentence of their condemnation.  
For the Trump next, we find it mentioned in all places almost, in which we meet with any thing of the day of judgement. Our Saviour telleth us of the coming of the Son of man, that he shall send his Angels with a great sound of a Trumpet, Matth. 24.31 St. Paul the like In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump, (for the Trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed, 1 Cor. 15.52. And in another place more fully, The Lord himself shall descend from Heaven with a shout, with the voice of the Archangel and with the trump of Christ, and the dead in Christ shall rise first, 1 Thes. 4.16. Now that which Christ and his Apostle say of the time to come, the same St. john saith of it, as of a thing done before his face; speaking expressly of this trumpet, both in the first chapter of his Revelation, vers. 10. and in the 4. chapter, vers. 1. So far it is agreed on without doubt or scruple. But then the difference will be thus, whether the speech be proper, or only figurative, whether it were a real Trumpet, or but Metaphorical. If figurative, than the phrase doth signify no more than this, that Christ shall find a means to call all the Nations of the world to appear before him; as if it were with the sound of a trumpet: the trumpet being used amongst the jews by Gods own appointment, for calling the Assembly and removing the camp of Israel 
(m) Numb. 10.2. . If but a Metaphorical Trumpet, than it may signify no more than a mighty noise, wherewith the dead shall be awakened from the sleep of the Grave: such as that voice spoken by the Royal Prophet, which shaketh the Wilderness, even the great Wilderness of Cades. The best way to resolve this doubt is to look unto the giving of the Law on Mount Sinai, which was delivered in the hands of an Angel 
(n) Psal. 24.8. , and much after the same manner, as the day of judgement is described in the holy Gospel. And it came to pass (saith Moses) on the third day in the morning, that there were thunders and lightnings, and a thick cloud upon the Mount, and the voice of the Trumpet exceeding loud, so that all the people that was in the Camp trembled 
(o) Exod. 19.16. . And all the people saw the thunderings, and the lightnings, and the noise of the Trumpet, and the Mountain smoking; and when the people saw it, they removed and stood a far off 
(p) Exod. 20.18. . Whatsoever noise that was, which is by Moses said to be made with the sound of the Trumpet, when the Law was given: the same do I conceive it will also be, when all the world is called to given an account of all their doings, whether conform unto that Law, or against the same. The Trumpet was sounded with great terror, when the Law was given, that the whole world might hear the noise of the Echo of it, and thereby brought into a fear of violating any part of that sacred Rule. For though the Law seemeth to be given only to the house of Israel, and to none but them; as indeed it was given to none but them by the hand of Moses; in which respect it is not binding to the Gentiles, as the Schoolmen very well observe: yet being it was naturally imprinted in the hearts of men, as the perpetual moral Law of the most high God, although the tract and footsteps of it were almost defaced; the Gentiles at their peril were obliged to keep it, and to take notice of the publication of it, whensoever, and by what means soever, it should arrive unto their Ears. So that the trumpet spoken of in the books of Moses is like that of Triton in the Poet, as shrill as that, and without all peradventure to be heard as far. Of which Ovid thus 
(q) Ovid. ●et. l. 1. ; 
— buccina●umitur ●umitur illi,  
Tortilis, in medium quae turbine crescit ab imo.  
Buccina quae medio concepit ubi aera Ponto,  
Littora voce replet sub utraque jacentia Phoebo.   
Thus Englished by George Sandys.  
He his wreathed trumpet takes (as given in charge)  
That from the turning bottom grows more large.  
To which when he gives breath 'tis heard by all  
From far uprising Phoebus to his fall.  
Such also shall the voice of the Trumpet be in the day of Judgement, when all the Nations of the world shall be called together, and called to account for their actions past, which ought to have been squared by the rule of the Law, of which they have such ample notice, and such deep impressions; although they did not stand at the foot of the Mount, when it was published by the jews. The Gentiles (saith St. Paul) which have not the law, (that is to say, which have it not in writing as the jews had) do by nature the things contained in the Law; and having not the Law (so given) are a law unto themselves 
(r) Rom. 2.14, 15. : which show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another. So that all Nations of the world, not the jews alone, having such deep characters of the Law of God imprinted in them, are thereby made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
(s) Rom. 1.20. , or without excuse, if they keep it not. And being bound to keep the law, shall be judged according to the law: and therefore shall be called together to receive their sentence, by that or the like noise of a Trumpet, in which the law was published by the Lord Almighty.  
The next thing here to be considered, is the attendance of the Angels; which doubtless are not taken in to fill up the train, to make the manner of his coming the more brave and glorious, but for some other special and more weighty use. Therefore our Saviour having told us, that the Son of man shall come in glory, and all the holy Angels with him 
(t) Mat 25.30. ; adds also in the following words, and before him shall all the Nations of the world be gathered. Gathered together, but by whom? by those very Angels. Then, saith he, shall he send his Angels, with the sound of the Trumpet, and shall gather together the Elect from the four winds, etc. 
(u) Id. 24.31. . What, the Elect? and none but they? Not so. For they shall also gather out of his Kingdom all things that offend, and them that do iniquity 
(x) Id. 13.40. . But having gathered them together, is their work then done? Not yet, for they must also separate the wicked from the righteous man, the goats from the sheep, the tares from the good seed 
(y) Ib. v. 30. , the good fish from the bad 
(z) Ib. v. 49. : that being so disposed in their ranks and files, they may together hear their sentence, whether life, or death. But when the sentence is pronounced, is there any thing more behind for these ministering Spirits? Much more assuredly: The greatest part of their employment is yet to come. Gather ye together first the Tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them; but gather the Wheat into my barn 
(a) Ib. v. 30. . After the gathering and the sentence, then comes in the binding. And binding is a term derived from the Courts of justice, according to the course whereof, the Prisoner is led bound to his Execution: so to prevent all hope and possibility of their escape, and make them yield unto their censure with the less resistance. I lictor, liga manus, verberato, infoelici arbori suspendito 
(b) Livius hist. Decad. 1. l. 1. . Here Lictor, bind the prisoner, scourge him, or hang him on the Tree, as the sentence varied: but whether verberato or suspendito, there was still liga manus, the binding of the prisoner as a part of his punishment God doth so deal with wicked and ungodly men, as the great Tyrant Nabuchadnezzar did with the three Hebrew children, in the Book of Daniel 
(c) Dan. 3.20, 21. : command them to be first bound, and after cast into the midst of the fiery furnace. The like we find in Virgil also; Vinxerat & post Terga manus quos mitteret umbris: the Poet speaking there of those wretched men, whom Aeneas was about to sacrifice to the powers below. Well, being thus bound, and ready for the Execution, what comes after next? Alligate ad comburendum, saith our Saviour's Parable; bind them to burn them, saith the Text. And here the case is somewhat altered, as it relates unto the Ministers, though still the same in reference to the Malefactors. Before it was Colligite, and Alligate, i. e. gather them together, and bind them fast: here not comburite, but ad comburendum. The holy Angels were the Ministers to attach the sinner, to bring him before God's Tribunal, and after sentence is pronounced to lay hands upon him, and make him ready for the punishment which he is to suffer. But that being done, they do confign him over to the Fiends of hell, to the Tormentors, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as our Redeemer calls them in the 18. chapter of St. Matthew, vers. 34. The holy Angels are the Ministers of this dreadful Court, the Devil and his Angels are the Executioners: who bearing an old grudge to man from the first beginning, will doubtless execute his Office on him with the most extremity. And thus accordingly they do: Anima damnata continuo invaditur a Daemonibus, qui crudelissime eam rapiunt & ad infernum deducunt 
(d) Cyril de exitu Animae. , as before we had it from St. Cyril. But in their Ministry, after Judgement, to the just and righteous, the case is otherwise. The Angels, as the Scripture tells us, are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Ministering Spirits; sent out to minister unto them which shall be heirs of Salvation. Sent out to minister unto them when they are alive; sent out, to carry their souls, (as they did that of Lazarus) into Abraham's bosom, when they are deceased; sent out to gather the Elect, together from the four winds. And when the joyful sentence is pronounced upon them, they leave them not, till they have brought them to their place in the heavenly glories. It is not only Colligite, gather them together, but Congregate in horreum meum, in our Saviour's Parable, Gather the Wheat into my barn: that is to say, as he expounds himself in another place, in gaudium Domini 
(e) Mat. 25.23. , into the joy of the Lord; Regnum a constitutione mundi paratum 
(f) Ibid. v. 34. , the Kingdom prepared for them before the foundations of the world were laid; or as St. Paul doth change the phrase, in Civitatem Dei viventis 
(g) Heb. 12.20. , the City of the living God: To such end serve the Angels in the day of judgement. Which though they execute with great cheerfulness at the Lords command; and are assured of their own confirmation in the state of bliss: yet can they not but tremble, as the Fathers have it, at the great hazard which is then to be undergone, by their Fellow-servants. So witnesseth St. Basil, saying, At Christ's coming from the Heavens every creature shall tremble; Even the Angels themselves shall not be without fear, for they shall also be present, though they shall give no account to God 
(h) Basil. in Hex. Homil. 11. . Not without fear? Of what? Of their fellow-servants, and of God's wrath upon the world, as St. Chrysostom hath it. At that day, saith the Father, all things shall be full of astonishment, horror and fear. A great fear shall even then possess the Angels, and not the Angels only, but the Archangels, and Thrones, and Powers of Heaven, because their fellow-servants are to undergo the judgement of their actions past 
(i) Chrysost. Epist. 5. ad Theod. . Such and so terrible is the manner of Christ's coming to judgement, that not alone the guilty persons, or the Saints themselves, but even the very Angels are possessed with terror.  
As for the method of this day, whether the righteous or the wicked shall come first to judgement, hath been made a question: some thinking that the wicked shall be first condemned, before the righteous do receive their absolution; and others, that the righteous shall be first absolved, before the wicked have the sentence of their condemnation. They that maintain the first opinion, do ground themselves upon that passage in our Saviour's Parable, in which the Reapers are commanded first to gather the Tares, and bind them in bundles for to burn them; and then to gather the Wheat into his Barn. But this illation is ill grounded, and doth much worse agree with our Saviour's method used in other places. For in the parable of the Net cast into the Sea, the good fish were first gathered into Vessels 
(k) Mat 13. 4●. , before the bad were thrown away: and in the other parable of the Sheep and the Goats, Venite hath precedency of Discedite 
(l) Mat. 25.41. , the blessed of the Father were first absolved, before the cursed were condemned to eternal torments. Nor will it serve the turn which is said by some, that though the merits of the just are prius in discussione 
(m) Gorran. in Mat. 13. , first taken in consideration, and enquired into: yet shall the punishment of the wicked and ungodly man be prius in executione, first put in execution, and inflicted on them. For this as ill agreeth with those texts of Scripture in which it is said not only in particular of the twelve Apostles that they shall sit on twelve Thrones judging the twelve Tribes of Israel 
(n) Mat. 19.28. ; but also of the Saints in general, that they shall judge the world 
(o) 1 Cor. 6.2. , as St. Paul hath told us. That they shall judge the world; but how? Not only s●la comparatione, by telling them or rather upbraiding them with their impieties and impenitencies, as full well they may; in which respect the Ninivites, and the Queen of the South, are in the Gospel said to condemn the jews 
(p) Mat. 12.42. , but Approbatione Divinae sententiae 
(q) Estius in 1 Cor. c. 6. , by approving and applauding that most righteous judgement, which Christ the Supreme Judge shall pronounce against them. Which could not be in case the wicked did receive their final condemnation, before the righteous were admitted into some participation of the heavenly glories. When therefore it is said in the former parable, Colligite primum, Gather first the tares together: either the word first must have reference to that of binding which doth follow after; first gather them, and then bind them up: Or else it must be said, and perhaps more rightly, that the gathering of the tares is there first propounded, not because first in order of the several judgements, but because they gave occasion unto that discourse betwixt the Heavenly Husbandman and his household servants. This difference thus composed, and this rub removed, the method used in this great action will disclose itself. The Lord CHRIST JESUS being set in his glorious Throne, the many thousands of his holy Angels shining round about him, and the Saints apparelled with their bodies standing all before him or rather placed at his right hand, as in the Parable; the Reprobates being left on the Earth beneath, or standing at his left hand, at as great a distance: he shall first pronounce the sentence of Absolution upon his Elect: 
(r) Mat. 25.34.  Come (saith he) O ye blessed of my Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you, from the foundation of the world. And this shall first be done for these reasons specially: first that the wicked seeing from what bliss they are fallen, and what reward is laid up for the righteous man, may be the more confounded in the apprehension of their own misfortune: and secondly to show how much more CHRIST is prone to mercy, than he is to judgement; according to the good old verse, Ad poenam tardus Deus est, ad praemia velox. This done, there shall be placed twelve Thrones near the Throne of Christ, for the twelve Apostles: who as they were the Lords chief Agents in the work of the Gospel, so shall they be his principal Assessors in the Act of Judicature; the residue of the Saints and Martyrs approving and applauding (as before I said) that most righteous judgement, which CHRIST shall then pronounce against all the wicked, saying, Depart from me ye cursed into everlasting fire, prepared for the Devil and his Angels 
(s) Mat. 25.41. . This dreadful sentence thus pronounced, and the condemned persons being delivered over by the Angels of God to the Devil and his, according to the sentence of that righteous judge: CHRIST shall arise from his Tribunal, and together with his elect Angels and most blessed Saints, shall in an orderly and triumphant manner ascend into the Heaven of Heavens: where unto every one of his glorious Saints he shall bestow the immarcessible Crown of glory 
(t) 1 Pet. 5.4. , and make them Kings and Priests unto God the Father 
(u) Apoc. 1.6. . When all the Princes of the Earth have laid down their Sceptres at the feet of CHRIST; God shall be still a King of Kings, a King indeed of none but Kings. Rex Regum, Dominus Dominantium always, but most amply them. For than shall CHRIST deliver up the Kingdom unto God the Father, (which how it must be understood, we have shown before). And the Saints laying down their Crowns at the feet of Christ, shall worship and fall down before him, saying, Blessing, honour, glory, and power 
(x) Apoc. 5.13.  be unto him that sitteth upon the Throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever. For thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood, out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and Nation, and hast made us Kings and Priests to God 
(y) Ibid. v. 9.10. , to reign with thee in thy Kingdom for evermore.  
Thus have I made a brief but a plain discovery, so far forth as the light of Scripture could direct me in it, both of the manner of our Saviour's coming unto Judgement; and of the Method he shall use in the act of judging. That which comes after judgement, whether life or death, whether it be the joys of Heaven or the pains of Hell, will fall more properly under the consideration of the last Article of the Creed, that of Life Everlasting: and there we mean to handle all those particulars which I think pertinent thereunto. In the mean time a due and serious consideration of this day of judgement will be exceeding necessary to all sorts of people: and be the strongest bridle to restrain them from the acts of sin, that ever was put into the mouths of ungodly men. For what a bridle think we, must it be unto them, to keep them from unlawful lusts, nay from sinful purposes, when they consider with themselves, that in that day, the hearts of all men shall be opened, their desires made known, and that no secrets shall be hid; but all laid open as it were, to the public view? What a strong bridle must it be to curb them and to hold them in, when they are in the full career and race of wickedness, when they consider with themselves, that there will be no way nor means to escape this Judgement? Though they procure the Rocks to fall upon them, and the Hills to hide them, yet will God's Angels find them out; and gather them from every corner of the World, be they where they will. Though they have flattered their poor souls, and said, Tush God will not see it; or have disguised themselves with fig-leaves, out of a silly hope to conceal their nakedness; or wiped their lips so cunningly with the harlot in the Book of Proverbs, that no man can discern a stolen kiss upon them; yet all this will not serve the turn. God will for all this bring them unto judgement, and apprehend them by his Angels when they go a gathering. There shall not one of them escape the hands of these diligent Sergeants; Ne unus quidem, no not one. And finally what a bridle must it be unto them, to hold them from exorbitant wickedness, as either the crucifying again of the Lord of glory, the persecuting of the Saints, their mischievous plots against the Church in her peace and Patrimony; when they consider with themselves that he whom thus they crucify, is to be their judge; and that those poor souls whom they now contemn, shall give a vote or suffrage on their condemnation; and that the poor afflicted Church which they made truly militant by their foul oppressions, malgre their tyranny and confederacies, shall become Triumphant? And on the other side, what a great comfort must it be to the righteous man, to think that Christ who all this while hath been his Mediator with Almighty God, shall one day come to be his judge? What a great consolation must it be unto him in the time of trouble, to think that all his groans are registered, his tears kept in a bottle, and his sighs recorded: and that there is a judge above who will wipe all the tears from his eyes, and give him mirth in stead of mourning? What an encouragement must it be unto him in the way of godliness, when he considereth with himself that there is laid up for him a Crown of glory, which the Lord the righteous Judge will give him at that day, and give it him in the fight both of men and Angels? Finally what strength and animation must it put into them to make them stand courageously in the cause of Christ, and to contemn what ever misery can be laid upon them, in the defence of Christ's and the Church's cause: when they consider with themselves, that there is no man who hath lost Father or Mother, or wife or children, or lands and possessions for the sake of Christ; but shall receive much more in this present world, and in the world to come life everlasting? For behold he cometh quickly, (as himself hath told us) and his reward is with him, to give to every man according as his work shall be. Even so Lord Jesus, So be it. Amen.    

THE SUM Of Christian Theology, Positive, Philological, and Polemical; Contained in the APOSTLES CREED, or Reducible to it.  
THE THIRD PART.  
By Peter Heylyn.  1 Cor. 12.13. 
For by one Spirit are we all Baptised into one Body, whether we be jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.  
LONDON: Printed for Henry Seyle. 1654.   

ARTICLE IX. Of the Ninth ARTICLE OF THE CREED, Ascribed to St. JAMES the Son of ALPHEUS. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (i. e.) Credo & in Spiritum sanctum; sanctam Ecclesiam Catholicam, (i. e.) I believe in the Holy Ghost, the holy Catholic Church.  

CHAP. I. Touching the Holy Ghost, his divine Nature, Power, and Office▪ the Controversy of his Procession laid down Historically. Of Receiving the Holy Ghost, and of the several ministrations in the Church appointed by him.  
WE are now come unto the third and last part of this Discourse, containing in the first place the Article of the Holy Ghost, and of the holy Catholic Church, gathered together, and preserved by the power thereof: And in the rest those several Gifts and special Benefits which Christ conferreth, by the operation of this blessed Spirit, on the particular Members of his Congregation; that is to say, the joining of the Saints together in an holy Communion, the free remission of our sins in this present life, resurrection of the body after death, and the uniting again of Soul and Body unto life eternal. This is the sum and method of the following Articles, and these we shall pursue in their order; beginning first with that of the Holy Ghost: Whose gracious assistance I implore, to guide me in the ways of Truth that so the words of my mouth, and the meditations of my heart, may be always acceptable in the sight of God, the Lord, my strength and my Redeemer. But because the word or notion of the Holy Ghost is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a word of various signification in the Book of God: we will first look upon it in those significations, and then conclude on that which is chiefly, pertinent to the intent and purpose of the present Article. For certainly the Orator's Rule is both good and useful, viz. Prius dividenda antequam definienda sit oratio 
a Tull. in Orat. ; That we must first distinguish of the Terms in all Propositions before we come unto a positive definition of them. According to which Rule, if we search the Scripture, we shall there find that the Holy Ghost is first taken personaliter, or essentialiter, for the third person in the Oeconomie of the glorious Trinity. We find him in this sense in the incarnation of our Lord and Saviour, as the principal Agent in that Work; The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, Luk. 1.35. And in his Baptism, descending on him like a Dove, to fit him and prepare him for the Prophetical Office he was then to exercise; And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a Dove upon him, Luk. 3.22. From which descent St. Peter telleth us that he was anointed with the Holy Ghost and with power, and that from thenceforth he went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed with the Devil 
b Luk. 10.38. . In the next place, the Holy Ghost is used in Scripture, to signify the Gifts and Graces of the holy Spirit; as in Act. 2. where it is said of the Apostles, that they were all filled with the holy Ghost, ver. 4. not with his essence, or his person, but with the impressions of the Spirit, the Gifts and Graces of the Holy Ghost; such as the Gift of Tongues mentioned in the following words; The Gift of the Holy Ghost; as it is called expressly, Ver. 38. Thus read we also that the holy Ghost was given by the hands of Peter, Act. 8.17, 18. And by the hands of Paul, Act. 19.6. In which we read, that when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them, and they spoke with tongues and Prophesied, which last words are a commentary upon those before, and show, that by the holy Ghost which did come upon them, is meant the Gift of Tongues, and the power of Prophesying, both which the holy Ghost then conferred upon them. And lastly it is taken not only for the ability of doing Miracles, as speaking with strange Tongues, Prophesying, curing of Diseases, and the like to these, but for the Authority and Power which in the Church is given to some certain men to be Ministers of holy things to the rest of the people. As when Christ breathed on his Apostles, and said unto them, Receive the holy Ghost 
c Joh. 20.22. ; that is to say, Receive ye an holy and spiritual power over the souls of men, a part whereof consisteth in the remitting and retaining of sins, mentioned in the words next following, and serving as a Comment to explain the former. In which respect the Holy Ghost said unto certain of the Elders in the Church of Antioch, Segregate mihi Barnabam & Saulum, Separate unto me Barnabas and Saul, for the work whereunto I have called them, Act. 13.2. It is the Holy Ghost which calls, it is his work to which they were called; and therefore separate mihi, separate to me, may not unfitly be expounded to my Work and Ministry, and consequently to the authority and power which belongs unto it. Which being premised, the meaning of the Article will in brief be this, That we believe not only that there is such a person as the Holy Ghost, in the Oeconomy of the blessed Trinity though that be principally intended;) but that he doth so distribute and dispose of his Gifts and Graces, as most conduceth to the edification of the Church of Christ. But this I cannot couch in a clearer way, as to the sense and doctrine of the Church of England, than in the words of Bishop jewel, who doth thus express it, Credimus spiritum sanctum, qui est tertia persona in sacra Triadi, illum verum esse Deum, etc. 
d 2 Cor. 7.1.  i. e. we believe that the Holy Ghost who is the Third Person in the holy Trinity, is very God, not made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding both from the Father and the Son, by an unspeakable means, and unknown to man; and that it is his property to mollify and soften man's heart, when he is once received thereinto, either by the wholesome Preaching of the Gospel, or by any other way; that he doth give men light, and guide them to the knowledge of God, to the ways of truth, to newness of life, and to everlasting hope of salvation. This being the sum of that which is to be believed of the Holy Ghost, both for his Person and his Office; we will first look upon his Person, on his Property or Office afterwards.  
And yet before we come unto his Person, I mean his Nature and his Essence, We will first look a little on the quid Nominis, the name by which he is expressed in the Book of God. In the Original he is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (with a double Article, as Luk. 3.22.) in Latin Spiritus sanctus, or the Holy Spirit, but generally in our English Idiom, the Holy Ghost. The Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 comes from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which signifieth to breath, and is the same with the Latin Spiro, from whence comes Spiritus, or the Spirit, a name not given, as I suppose, because he doth proceed from the Father, or the Son, or both, in the way of breathing (though Christ be said to breath upon his Apostles, when he said receive the Holy Ghost) but because the breath being in itself an incorporeal substance, and that which is the great preservative of all living creatures, it got the name first of Spiritus vitae (we read it in our English, the breath of life, Gen. 11.7.) and afterwards came to be the name of all unbodyed, incorporeal essences. For thus is God said to be a Spirit, God is a Spirit, joh. 4.24. The Angels are called Ministering Spirits, Heb. 1.14. the Soul of man is called his Spirit, let us cleanse ourselves, saith the Apostle, from all filthiness both of flesh and Spirit 
e 2 Cor. 7.1. , that is, of the body and the soul: and by a metaphor, the motions of the mind whether good or evil, are called spirits also, as the spirit of giddiness, Isa. 19.14. the spirit of error, 1 Tim. 4.1. the spirit of envy, jam. 4.5. which come all from the unclean spirit mentioned Luk. 11.24. And thus in general, the pious motions in the mind are called Spirits too, Quench not the spirit, saith St. Paul 
f 1 Thes. 5.20. , i. e. those godly motions to the works of Faith and Piety, which the Holy Spirit of God doth secretly kindle in thee. For the word Ghost it is originally Saxon, and signifieth properly the soul of a man: as when we read of Christ, that he gave up the Ghost, Mark. 15.37. and in the rest of the Evangelists also, the meaning is, that his soul departed from his body, he yielded up his soul to the hands of God, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, saith the Original, Expiravit, as the Latin reads it; that is to say, he breathed out his soul, or he breathed his last. Nor doth it signify the soul only (though that most properly) but generally also, any spiritual substance, as doth the word spiritus in the Latin: a touch whereof we have still remaining in the Adjective Ghostly, by which we mean that which is spiritual, as our Ghostly Father, Ghostly Counsel, i. e. our Father in the spiritual matters, counsel that savoreth of the spirit. So then the Holy Ghost, and the Holy Spirit, are the same Person here, though in different words; and the word Holy which is added, doth clearly difference him from all other spirits: Not that God being a spirit, is not holy also, or that the Angelical spirits are not replenished with as much holiness as a created nature can be capable of; but because it is his Office to sanctify (or make holy) all the elect Children of God; therefore hath he the title or attribute of holy annexed unto him: And yet the title of holy is not always added to denote this person, though when we find mention of the Holy Ghost, or the Holy Spirit, it is meant and spoken of him only. For sometimes he is called the Spirit, without any adjunct, the Spirit, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or by way of eminency; but still with reference to those gifts which he doth bestow. The manifestation of the spirit (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Article demonstrative) is given to every man to profit withal 
g 1 Cor. 12.7, 8 , For to one is given by the Spirit, the word of wisdom, to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit. Sometimes he is called the Spirit of the Father, as Matth. 10.20. It is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of the Father which speaketh in you; sometimes the Spirit of the Son, as Gal. 4.6. where it is said, that God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying Abba Father. Most generally he is called the Spirit of God, as Gen: 1.2. and Matth. 3.16. and infinite other places of the holy Scripture; and more particularly the Spirit of Christ, Rom. 8.9. in which place he is also called the Spirit of God. Ye are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if that the Spirit of God dwell in you, there the Spirit of God; if any have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his, So the Spirit of Christ The Spirit both of God and Christ, and in one verse both.  
So far we are onwards on our way for discovery of the nature of this bless●d Spirit, as to have found him out to be the Spirit of God the Father, from whom he doth proceed by an unspeakable way of emanation, and unknown to man; for he proceedeth from the Father, as our Saviour telleth us 
g John 15.26. ; and to be also the Spirit of Christ, the Son of God, by whom he was breathed on the Apostles; and so proceeding from the Son, doth proceed from both. Sent from the Father, at the desire and prayer of the Son; I will pray the Father, and he shall send you another Comforter, john 14.16. Sent by the Son, with the consent and approbation of the Father; whom I will send unto you from the Father, john 15.26. and so sent of both. And yet not therefore the less God, because sent by either, than JESUS CHRIST is God, God for ever blessed, as St. Paul calls him, Rom. 9.5. because he was sent by God the Father, He sent his Son made of a woman, (Gal. 4.4.) saith the same Apostle.  
If any doubt hereof, as I know some do, he may be sent for resolution of his doubt to the beginning of Genesis, where he shall find the Spirit of God moving on the waters, Gen. 1.2. And to the Law, where he shall read how the same Spirit came down on the Seventy Elders, Numb. 11.26. And to the Psalms, Thou sendest forth thy Spirit, and they are created, Psal. 104.30. And to the Prophets, The Spirit of God is upon me, saith the Prophet Isaiah, Chap. 61.1. which was Christ's first Text 
h Luk. 4.18. ; And I will pour my Spirit upon all flesh, saith the Prophet joel, Chap. 1.28. which was Peter's first Text 
i Acts 2.17. . The Spirit of God is God, no question; for in Deo non est nisi Deus, say the Schoolmen rightly. Not a created Spirit, as the Angels were, For in the beginning when God created the Heaven and the Earth, and all things visible and invisible, than the Spirit was; and was not only actually in a way of existence, but was of such a powerful influence in the Creation of the World, that on the moving of this Spirit on the face of the Waters, the darkness was removed from the face of the deep, and the Chaos of undigested matter made capable of Form and Beauty.  
In the New Testament the evidence is far more clear than that of the Old; by how much the Sun of Light did shine more brightly in the times of the Gospel than in those of the Law. Saith not St. Peter in the Acts, Why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie unto the Holy Ghost? and than adds presently, Thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God 
k Acts 5.3, 4. . What saith St. Austin on this Text? The Holy Ghost (saith he) is God, Unde Petrus cum dixisset, ausus e● mentiri Spiritui Sancto, continuo secutus adjunxit quid esset Spiritus Sanctus, & ait, non mentitus es hominibus sed Deo 
l August. contr. litter. Petil. l. 3.28. , i. e. Therefore when Peter said unto Ananias, thou hast dared to lie to the Holy Ghost, he added presently, to show what was the Holy Ghost, Thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God. Saith not St. Paul, Know ye not that ye are the Temple of God? How so? Because the Spirit of God dwelleth in you 
m 1 Cor. 3.16. . What saith the Father unto this? Ostendit Paulus deum esse Spiritum Sanctum, & ideo non esse Creaturam 
n August. de mor. Eccles. Cath. l. 1.16. ; that is to say, St. Paul by this showeth, That the Holy Ghost is God, and so no Creature. Doth not the same Apostle say in another place, Know ye not that your bodies are the Temple of the Holy Ghost? and than subjoins, Glorify God therefore in your body 
o 1 Cor. 6.19, 20. . And doth not the same Father infer from thence the Deity or Godhead of the Holy Ghost, Ne quisquam Spiritum Sanctum negaret Deum, continuo secutus ait, Glorificate & portate Deum in corpore vestro 
p August. Epist. 174. ; Lest any man (saith he) should possibly deny the Holy Ghost to be God, he adds immediately, Glorify and bear God in your bodies. To seek for Testimonies from more of the Fathers, to confirm this point, were to run into an endless Ocean of Allegations; there being few who lived after the rising of the Arian and Macedonian Heresies, who have not written whole Tracts in defence hereof; and none at all, who give not very pregnant evidence to the cause in hand. But where the Scripture is so clear, what need they come in. And so exceeding clear is Scripture, as is shown already, that I marvel with what confidence it could be said by Doctor Harding in his Reply to Bishop jewel, That though the Doctrine of the Church of England were true and Catholic in this point, yet we had neither express Scripture for it, nor any of the four first General Councils 
q Hard. against the Apol. l. 2. ●. 1. Di. 2. ; and thereon tacitly inferreth, That the Deity of the Holy Ghost depended for the proof thereof, not on holy Scripture, but on the Tradition of the Church, and the Authority of some subsequent Councils of the Pope's confirming. To which, that learned Prelate wittily replieth, That if God cannot be God, unless he be allowed of by the Pope and Church of R●me, than we are come again to that which Tertullian wrote merrily of the Heathens, saying, Nisi homini Deus placuerit, Deus non erit 
r Tertul. in Apolog. c. 5. ; Homo jam Deo propitius esse debebit; i.e. Unless God humour man, he shall not be God.  
Some further Arguments may be used to confirm this Truth, and they no less concludent than those before: As namely, from the Form of Baptism ordained by Christ, In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost 
s Matth. 28 19 ; From the Form of Benediction used by St. Paul, The Grace of our Lord jesus Christ, and the Love of God, and the Fellowship of the Holy Ghost 
t 2 Cor. 13.13. ; From the Doxology or Form of giving glory, used in the Church, and used, as St. Basil confidently averreth, from the first beginning 
u Basil. de Sp. Sanct. l. 2. , Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost; And finally, from the place it holds in the present Creed, composed by the joint concurrence of the Blessed Apostles. But that which I shall specially insist upon, is that passage in three of the Evangelists, touching the sin●t ●t blasphemy against the Holy Spirit of God, which is there said to be of that heinous nature, that it shall neither be forgiven in this world, nor in the world to come, Matth. 12.32. That is to say, It shall never have forgiveness, as S. Mark expounds it, Mark 3.29 St. Ambrose gathereth from this Text, a concluding Argument against the Macedonian and Eunomian Heretics, who held the Holy Ghost to be only a created power. Quomodo inter Creaturas a●det quisquam Spiritum Sanctum computare, 
x Ambr. de S●. Sanct. l. 1. c. 3.  etc. How dareth any man (saith he) compute the Holy Ghost amongst the rest of the Creatures, considering that it is affirmed by the Lord himself, That whosoever speaketh against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him? And to this inference of his we may well subscribe, though the sin or blasphemy spoken of by our Lord and Saviour, was not against the Person of the Holy Ghost▪ but against his Power. For that no sin or heresy against his person was so irremissible, as to exclude the offending party from all hope of pardon, is evident by the constant practice of the Primitive Church; which as St. Chrysostom observeth, used daily to receive again to the Word and Sacraments the Eunomian Heretics, on the recanting of their Error. That therefore being not the si● which is here intended, it would be worth the while, and very pertinent to our present business, to inquire into it; though as St. Augustine notes right well, In omnibus Scripturis sanctis nulla major quaestio, nulla difficilior 
y August. de Verb. Dom. in monte. ; That there is not a greater, nor more difficult question in all the Scripture. And well might he say so of all men, who in delivering his own judgement upon the point, doth so much vary from himself, that it is impossible to find what he doth resolve on. For sometimes he makes it to be final impenitency, as Lib. de fide ad Pet. c. 3. Sometimes to be despair of God's mercy, as in his Comment on the Romans; Sometimes to be a denying of the Church's power to forgive sins, as in his Eucheirid. c. 83. Sometimes to be sins of malice, as De Ser. Domini in monte, l. 1. And sometimes nearer to the truth, to be an ascribing of the works of the Holy Ghost to the power of the Devil, as in his Tract De Qu●st. ex utroque Testam. quaest. 102. Nor do the Writers of the former or later times agree better in this point with one another, than that Learned Father with himself: Some holding it to be a renouncing of the Faith of Christ, as the Novatians 
z Id. ibid. ; others the denying of the Divinity of Christ, as Hilary 
a Hilar. in Con. 12. ; Philastrius extending it unto every Heresy 
b Philast. in Haer. Rhetorli. ; and Origen (whom some of the Novatians also followed) to every sin committed after Baptism 
c Ath●nas. Homil. in Matth. 12. . For later Writers, the Schoolmen generally make it to be sins of malice; affirming sins of infirmity to be committed against the Father, whose proper attribute is Power; and sins of ignorance against the Son, whose proper attribute is Wisdom; and therefore sins against the Holy Ghost must be sins of malice, because his attribute is Love. And on the other side, the Protestants, as generally, do make it to be final Apostasy, or a wilful and malicious resisting of the Truth to the very last. And so it is defined by Calvin, who makes them to be guilty of this sin against the Holy Ghost, Qui divinae veritati (cujus fulgore sic per stringuntur, ut ignorantiam causari nequeant) tamen destinata malicia resist●nt, in hoc tantum ut resistant 
d Calv. Instit. l. 3. c. 3. ; that is to say, Who out of determined malice resist the known Truth of God, (with the Beams whereof they are so dazzled, that they cannot pretend ignorance) to the end, only to resist. But God forbid, that most, if at all any of the sins before enumerated, should come within the compass of that grievous sentence which is denounced against blaspheming of the Holy Ghost▪ For if either every sin committed after Baptism, or every sin of malice, or despair of mercy, or falling into heresy (especially in that large sense as Philastrius takes it) should be uncapable of pardon, it were almost impossible for any man to be said. And for the rest, final Impenitency is not so properly a particular and distinct species of sin, as a general circumstance which may accompany any sin: And many of those who have renounced the Faith of Christ, under persecution, or called his divinity in question, did afterwards recant their Errors, and became good Christians. Final Apostasy indeed, and a malicious resisting of the known Truth, till the very last, are most grievous sins, and shall no question be rewarded with eternal punishment; as every other sin shall be which is not expiated with Repentance; but can with no more right or reason, be called the sin or blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, than unrepented Murder, unrepented Adultery, unrepented Heresy, or any other of that nature. Therefore to set this business right, it is judiciously observed by my Learned Friend Sir R. F. in his Tractate Of the Blasphemy of the Holy Ghost, First, That this sin so much disputed and debated, in neither of the three Evangelists which record this passage, is called The sin against the Holy Ghost, but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost; Secondly, That blaspheming, according to the true Etymon of the Word, is a blasting of the fame of another man, a malicious detracting from him, or speaking against him; as both St. Matthew, and St. Luke do expound the word, Matth. 12.32. and Luke 12.10. Thirdly, That these words were spoken by our Saviour Christ, against the Scribes and Pharisees, who traduced his Miracles, affirming. That that wondrous work of casting out Devils, which he had wrought by the power of the Spirit of God, as he himself affirmeth, Matth. 12.28. was done by the power and help of Beelzebub, the Prince of Devils, Vers. 24. And Fourthly, That the Scribes and Pharisees, being the eye-witnesses of such miracles, as might make them know that Christ was a Teacher come from God, did notwithstanding lay that reproach upon them, to the end, That the people being beaten off from giving credit to his miracles, should give no faith unto his Doctrine. Upon which grounds he builds this definition of it, viz. The blasphemy against the Holy Ghost was an evil-speaking or slandering of the miracles of our Saviour Christ, by those, who though they were convinced by the miracles, to believe that such works could not be done but by the power of God, did yet maliciously say, That they were wrought by the power of the Devil. And hereupon he doth infer these two following Corollaries; First, That we have no safe rule to conclude, that any but the Scribes and Pharisees, and their confederates, committed (in those times) this blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, so condemned by Christ: And Secondly, That it is a matter of probability, that the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, is not a sin committable by any Christian who lived not in the time of our Lord and Saviour. And to say truth, If such a sin were practicable by us Christians since, it must needs be a very great marvel (if not somewhat more) that the Apostles, who were very precise and punctual in dehorting from all manner of sin, should never in any of their Epistles take notice of this, or give us any Caveat to beware thereof; and in particular, that St. Paul making a specification of the fruits of the Spirit, and such a general muster of the works of the flesh, as are repugnant thereunto 
e Gal. 5.19 etc. , should not so much as give a glance which doth look this way. To countenance the opinion of this Learned Gentleman, I shall add here the judgement of two learned Jesuits. Maldonates' first, Who makes this sin to be the sin of the Scribes and Pharisees, who seeing our Saviour cast out Devils, Manifesta Spiritus Sancti opera daemoni tribuebant 
f Maldonat. in Matth. 12. , ascribed the visible works of the Holy Ghost to the power of the Devil. Of Estius next, who distinguishing betwixt the sin against the Holy Ghost, and the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, referreth to the first all sins of determined malice; to the second, only such malicious and slanderous reproaches against the mighty works of God, Quale erat illud Scribarum divina miracula malitiosè calumniantium 
g Estias in Marc. 3. , As was that of the Scribes, maliciously slandering our Saviour's miracles. And if it be a sin or blasphemy, call it which you will, not acted but by them, and on that occasion, it is not practicable now.  
But leaving this to the determination of the Church of England (lawfully and Canonically represented in an holy Synod,) to which, that Learned Gentleman doth submit his judgement; proceed we on in our discourse of the Holy Ghost; concerning whose Divinity or Godhead, there is not so much difference in the Christian World, as in the manner of his Procession or Emission. And here indeed the World hath been long divided; the Greek Church keeping themselves to express words of Scripture 
h John 15.26. , making him to proceed from the Father only; the Latins, on the Authority of some later Councils, and Logical inferences from the Scripture, making him to proceed both from Father, and the Son. And though these last may seem to have the worst end of the Cause, in as much as Logical inferences to men of ordinary capacities, are not so evident as plain Text of Scripture; yet do they Anathematise and curse the other, as most desperate Heretics, if not Apostates from the Faith. Nor will they admit of any medium towards reconcilement, although the controversy by moderate and sober men is brought to a very narrow issue; and seemeth to consist rather in their Forms of Speech, than any material Terms of Difference. For Damascen the great Schoolman of the Eastern Church, though he deny that the Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Son, yet he granteth him to be Spiritum filii, & per filium 
i Damasc. de fid. Orth. l. 1. c. 1. , to proceed from the Father by the Son, and to be the Spirit of the Son. And Bessarion, and Gennadius, two of the Grecian Divines, who appeared in the name of that Church in the Council of Florence, and were like to understand the meaning of Damascen better than any of the Latins, affirmed (as Bellarmine tells us of them 
k Bellarm. de Christo. l. 2.27. ,) That he denied not the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son, as to the truth of his proceeding; Sed existimasse tutius dici per filium, quam ex filio, quoad modum loquendi, but thought only that it was the safer expression to say, That he proceeded by the Son, than from the Son. And Clictoveus in his Comment on that Book of Damascen, l. 1. c. 12. is of opinion, That the difference between the East and Western-Churches, as to this particular, is, In voce potius & modo explicandi, quam in ipsa re, More in the terms and manner of expression, than the thing itself. The Master of the Sentences doth affirm as much, saying, That the Greeks do differ from the Latins, Verbo non sensu, not in the meaning of the Point, but the forms of Speech 
l P. Lombard. Sent. l. 1. d. 11. . And more than so, The Greeks, saith he, confess the Holy Ghost to be the Spirit of the Son, with the Apostle, Gal. 4. And the Spirit of Truth, with the Evangelist, Joh. 16. And since it is not another thing to say, The Holy Ghost is the Spirit of the Father, and the Son, than that he is, or proceeds from the Father and the Son, in this they seem to agree with us in eandem fidei sententiam, on the same doctrine of Faith, though they differ in words.  
Thus also Rob. Grosthead, the learned and renowned Bishop of Lincoln, as he is cited by Scotus, a famous Schoolman 
m Scotus in Sent. l. 1. d. 11. qu. , delivereth his opinion touching this great Controversy. The Grecians (saith he) are of opinion, that the Holy Ghost is the Spirit of the Son, but that he proceedeth not from the Son, but from the Father only, yet by the Son; which opinion seemeth to be contrary to ours. But happily if two wise and understanding men, the one of the Greek Church, and the other of the Latin, both lovers of the truth, and not of their own expressions, did meet to consider of this seeming contrariety, it would in the end appear, Ipsam contrarietatem non esse veraciter realem sicut est vocalis, That the difference is not real, but verbal only. Azorius the great Casuist goeth further yet, and upon due examination of the state of the Question, not only freeth the Greeks from Heresy, but from Schism also 
n Azer. Inst. Moral. l. 8. c. 20. . By consequence the Church of Rome hath run into the greater and more grievous error, in condemning every Maundy Thursday in their Bulla Coenae the whole Eastern Churches; which for aught any of her own more sober children are able to discern on deliberation, are fully as Orthodox as herself in the truth of Doctrine, and more agreeable to antiquity in their forms of Speech.  
For if we please to look into the Ancient Writers, we shall find Tertullian saying very positively, Spiritum non aliunde quam à Patre per filium 
o Tertul. Cont. Praxean. , which is the very same with that of Damascen before delivered. And jerom, though a stout maintainer of the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son also, yet doth he sometimes fall upon this expression, Spiritus à Patre egreditur, & propter naturae societatem à filio mittitur 
p Hieron. in Ep. ad. Hedib. , That he proceedeth from the Father, and is sent by the Son; which none of the Greek Church will deny: But if we look upon the Fathers of the Eastern Churches, we shall find not only private men, as Basil, Nazianzen, Nyssen, Cyril, not to descend so low as Damascen, to make no mention of the proceeding of the Holy Ghost from the Son, at all; but a whole Synod of 180 Prelates gathered together in the second General Council at Constantinople 
q An. 385.  to be silent in it, though purposely assembled to suppress the Heresy of Macedonius, who had denied the Divinity of the Holy Ghost. For in the Constantinopolitan Creed, according as it stands in all old Records, the Father's having ratified the Nicene Creed, added these words for the declaring of their Faith in the Holy Ghost, viz. I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and giver of Life, who proceedeth from the Father, who together with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified, who spoke by the Prophets 
r V. : No word in this of his proceeding from the Son. And though this Creed was afterwards continued in the Council of Ephesus 
s An. 435. , yet so far was that Council from altering any thing which had been formerly delivered as to this particular, that it imposed a curse on those who should add unto it. And so it stood a long time in the Christian Church, possessing that part in the Public Liturgies, which it still retaineth. But in some tract of time, some Spanish Bishops in the eighth Council of Toledo 
t An. 671. , added the clause à filioque, and made it to run thus in their public Formulas, who proceedeth from the Father and the Son. The French not long after followed their example, but still the Church of Rome adhered to the old expression. Whereupon Charles the Great commanded a Council of his Prelates to be held at Aken (Aquisgranum it is called in Latin) to consider somewhat better of this addition 
u An. 809. , and caused some of them to be sent to Pope Leo the third, to have his opinion in the matter, who was so far from giving any allowance unto the addition, that he persuaded them to leave it out by little and little 
x Field of Chur. l. 3. c. 1. . And nor content to give this Counsel unto them, for fear lest the addition might creep in at Rome, he caused the Constantinopolitan Creed to be fairly written out on a Table of Silver, and placed it behind the Altar of St. Peter, to the end it might remain unto posterity as a lasting Monument of the true Faith which he professed. The like distaste did john the eighth declare against this addition 
y An. 857. , in a Letter by him written unto Photius, Patriark of Constantinople, in which he gives him to understand, not only that they had no such addition in the Church of Rome, but that he did condemn them who were Authors of it; adding withal, That as he was careful for his part, to cause all the Bishops of the West to be so persuaded of it, as he was himself; so that he did not think it reasonable, that any should be violently constrained to leave out the addition. But after in the year 883▪ Pope Nicholas the first caused this clause à filioque to be added also to the Creed, in all the Churches under the Command and Jurisdiction of the Popes of Rome; and from thence-forwards did they brand the Greek Churches with the brand of Heresy, for not admitting that clause to the Ancient Creeds, which they themselves had added of their own Authority, without the consent of the Eastern Churches, or so much as the pretence of a General Council. But as my Lord of Canterbury hath right well observed, in his learned Answer unto Fisher 
z Relation of the Conf. fol. 25. , It is an hard thing to add and anathematise too. And yet to that height of uncharitableness did they come at last, that whereas it was the miserable fortune of Constantinople to be taken by the Turks upon Whitsunday, being the Festival of the coming of the Holy Ghost, this was given out to be a just judgement on them from the Almighty, for thinking so erroneously of his Blessed Spirit; as if it might not be concluded in as good form of Logic, That sure the Knights of Rhodes had in their lives and actions denied Christ who bought them; because that Town and all the Island was taken by the Turks upon Christmas-day; or that the People of Chios had denied and abnegated the Resurrection of our Saviour, who redeemed them; because that Town, and therewith all the Island also, was taken by the said Turks upon Easter-day.  
I have now done with so much of the present Article, as relates unto the Person of the Holy Ghost, which is the first signification of the term or notion, as it is taken personaliter, and essentialiter. We must next look upon the word, as it is used to signify, in the Book of God, the gifts and graces of the Spirit, in which we shall discern both his power and office. These gifts and graces of the Spirit, the Schoolmen commonly divide into Gratis data, such as being freely given by God, are to be spent as freely for the good of others; of which kind are the gift of tongues, curing diseases, and the like; and gratum facientia, such as do make him good and gracious, on whom it pleaseth God to bestow the same, as Faith, justice, Charity. The first are in the Scripture called by the name of gifts; Now there are diversity of gifts (saith the Apostle) but the same Spirit 
a 1 Cor. 12.4, 8, 9, 10. : For to one is given by the Spirit the word of Wisdom; to another the word of Knowledge by the same Spirit; to another Faith by the same Spirit, to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits, to another divers kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. The later are called Fruits, by the same Apostle 
b Gal. 5.22, 23. , The Fruits of the Spirit, saith he, are love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance. The Gifts are known most commonly by the name of Gratis data; the Fruits pertain to Gratum facientia: The Gratum facientia belong to every man for himself, the Gratis data for the benefit of the Church in common. That which God giveth us for the benefit and use of others, must be so spent, that they may be the better for it; because not given unto us for own sakes only, nor to gain others to ourselves, but all to him. In which respect, Gods Servants are to be like Torches, which freely waste themselves to give light to others, like Powder on the day of some Public Festival, which freely spends itself to rejoice the multitude. That which he gives us for ourselves must be so improved, that we may thereby become fruitful unto all good works, vessels prepared and sanctified for the Master's use. In the first of these we may behold the power of the Holy Ghost; in the last, his office. His power in giving tongues to unlearned men, knowledge to the ignorant, wisdom to the simple, the gift of prophecy even unto very Babes and Sucklings, I mean to men not studied in the Liberal Sciences. A power so great, that no disease is incurable to it; no spirit so subtle and disguised, but is easy discerned by it; no tongue so difficult and hard which it cannot interpret, no miracle of such seeming impossibility, but it can effect it. In which regard the Holy Ghost is called in Scripture, The power of God; The power of the most High shall overshadow thee, Luke 1.35. And Christ our Lord having received the ointing of the holy Spirit, is said to be anointed with the Holy Ghost, and with power, Acts 10.38. Nor want I Reasons to induce me unto this opinion, that when Simon Magus had effected by his sorceries and lying wonders, to be called the great power of God 
c Acts 8.10. ; but that his purpose was to make men believe, that he was the Holy Ghost, or the Spirit of God; which title afterwards he bestowed on his strumpet Helena 
d Epiphan. in Haeres. Simon. , and took that of CHRIST unto himself, as the more famed, and fitting for his devilish purposes.  
Next for his Office, that consisteth in regenerating the carnal, and sanctifying the regenerate man. First, In regenerating of the carnal; For except a man be born of Water, and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God 
e John 3.5. , saith our Blessed Saviour of Water, as the outward Element, but of the holy Spirit, as the inward Efficient; which moving on the Waters of Baptism, as once upon the face of the great Abyss, doth make them quickening, and effectual unto newness of life. Then for the Work of Sanctification, that is wrought wholly by the Spirit; who therefore hath the name of the Holy Ghost, not only because holy in himself, formaliter, but because holy effective, making them holy who are chosen unto life eternal. So say St. Peter the first, and St. Paul the last of the Apostles. St. Peter first, Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit unto obedience, 1 Pet. 1.2. And so St. Paul, But ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified, in the Name of our Lord jesus, and by the Spirit of God, 1 Cor. 6.11. That is to say, justified in the Name of our Lord jesus, through Faith in him, and sanctified by the Spirit of God, through the effusion of his Graces in the Soul of Man. The work of Sanctification is not wrought but by many acts, as namely, By shedding abroad in our hearts that most excellent gift of charity, filling our souls with righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost 
f Rom. 14.17. ; by teaching us to add, To our faith virtue, and to virtue, knowledge; and to knowledge, temperance; and to temperance, patience; and to patience, godliness; and to godliness, brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness, charity 
g 2 Pet. 1.5 etc. ; that we be neither barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of Christ. Though Christ be the Head, yet is the Holy Ghost the Heart of the Church; from whence the vital spirits of grace and godliness are issued out unto the quickening of the Body mystical. And as the vital spirits in the body natural are sensibly perceived by the motion of the heart, the breathing of the mouth, and by the beating of the pulse; so by the same means may we easily discern the motions of the Spirit of Grace. First, It beginneth in the heart, by putting into us new hearts, more sanctified desires than we had before; A new heart will I also give you, and a new spirit will I put within you, saith the Lord by the Prophet Ezekiel 
h Ezek. 36.26, 27. . And to what end? That ye may walk in my Statutes, and keep my judgements. This new heart is like the new wine which our Saviour speaks of, not possible to be contained in old bottles, but will break out first in new desires. For Novum supervenisse spiritum nova demonstrant desideria, as St. Bernard hath it. Nor will it break out only in desires or wishes, but we shall find it on our tongues, for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh 
i Matth. 12.34. . And if the heart be throughly sanctified, we may be sure that no corrupt communication will come out of our mouths, but only such as is good to the use of edifying, and may minister grace unto the hearers 
k Eph. 4 29. . The same breath in the natural body, is Organon vitae & vocis, as experience telleth us, The Instrument of life and voice; it is the same we live by, and the same we speak by: And so it is also in the Body mystical, as well the vocal, as the vital breath, proceeding both alike from the Holy Ghost. Nor stays it only on the tongue, but as the beating of the pulse is best found at the hand; so if we would desire to know how the Spirit beateth, let us next take it by the hand, or rather by his handy works. For some there be who do confess Christ with their mouths 
l Tit. 1.16. , but yet deny him in their works. The Spirit of God is very active, and wheresoever it is, it will soon be working; if it do not work, it is no Spirit: For usque adeo proprium est spiritui operari, ut nisi operetur, non sit, as the Father hath it, So natural it is for the Spirit to bring forth good works, that if it do not so, than it is no Spirit. These Works St. Paul calls plainly, The fruits of the Spirit; Love, joy, peace, gentleness, goodness 
m Gal. 5.22. , and the rest that follow. Which as they are planted in the Soul, may be called the Graces, but as they are manifested in our actions, the Fruits of the Spirit; to show us that it is a dead spirit which brings forth no fruits, even as it is a dead faith, in St. james his judgement, which brings forth no works 
n Jam. 2.17. . In a word, as it was in the generation of our Saviour Christ, so it is also in the regeneration of a Christian man; both wrought by the effectual operation of the Holy Ghost. But these being chiefly matters practical, are beyond my purpose.  
Proceed we then to such as are more Doctrinal, which is the proper subject of my undertaking, from this acception of the word in which the Holy Ghost is taken for those gifts and graces, which out of his great bounty he bestoweth upon us; to that wherein it signifieth, The Power and Calling which in the Church is given to some certain men, to be Ministers of holy things to the rest of the people. That in this sense the word is taken, we have shown before, and are now come to show how it is performed, by what authority, and what gifts discharged and executed. The office of teaching in the Church doth properly belong to Christ, the Prophet of the New Testament, of whom Moses prophesied, Deut. 13.15. As both St. Peter 
o Acts 3 22. , and St. Stephen 
p & 7.37. , do affirm expressly. A Prophet whom all the people were to hear in every thing which he was pleased to say unto them 
q & 3.22, 23. ; and that commanded under such a terrible commination, that every Soul which would not hear the voice of that Prophet, was to be destroyed from amongst the people. Yet though it were an office proper to our Lord and Saviour, so proper that he seemed to affect it more, than either the Priesthood, or the Kingdom; He entered not upon the same, until he had received some visible designation from the Holy Ghost. That he took not on him to discharge his Prophetical Function, till after he was baptised by john in jordan, is evident by course and order of the Evangelical story: Not that his Baptism could confer any power upon him, or give him an authority which before he had not; for without doubt, the lesser is blessed of the greater, as St. Paul affirmeth 
r Heb. 7.7. ; and john confessed himself so much less than Christ, as that he was not worthy to untie his shoe 
s John 1.27. ; but that, as man, he did receive this power from the Holy Ghost, descending on him at that time in a bodily shape, and withal giving him that Sacred Unction, whereby he was inaugurated to so high an office. And to this Unction of the Spirit, doth he himself refer the power he had to Preach the Gospel, and to discharge all other parts of that weighty Function; and that too in the very first Sermon which he ever preached; to give the people notice that he preached not without lawful calling, or exercised a power which belonged not to him. For entering into the Synagogue of Nazareth on the Sabbath day, he took the Book, and fell upon that place of the Prophet Isaiah, where it is said, The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the Gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering sight unto the blind; to set at liberty them that are bruised, and to preach the acceptable year of the Lord 
t Luk. 4.16 etc. . Which having read, he closed the Book, and said unto them, This day is this Scripture fulfilled in your ears. That he did preach by virtue of some unction from the holy Spirit, is evident by his own Application of the Text, by which he gave his Auditors to understand, That he did not undertake the office of his own head only, but by the motion and impulsion of the Holy Ghost, by whom he was abundantly furnished with all requisite gifts which might prepare him thereunto. Non meo proprio privatoque, sed divino spiritu missus sum; eo actus, eo impulsus, eo plenus, ad praedicandum Evangelium venio 
u Maldon. in Luc. 4.16. , as the learned jesuit glosseth on it. But if you ask, where, or at what time he received this unction, we must send you for an Answer to St. Ieroms Commentary on those words of the Prophet, where we shall find, Expletum esse hanc unctionem illo tempore, quando baptizatus est in Jordane, & Spiritus sanctus in specie Columbae descendit super eum, & maenfit in illo 
x Hieron. in Isai 61.1. : That is to say, This unction or anointing was performed or fulfilled at that time, when he was baptised by john in jordan; and the Holy Ghost descended on him in the shape of a Dove, and remained with him. Nor doth St. jerom stand alone in this Exposition, Irenaeus, Athanasius, ●uffinus, Augustine, and Prosper, (all of them Ancient Writers, and of great renown) concurring with him in the same. And to this unction or anointing at the time of his Baptism, St. Peter questionless alludeth, where preaching to Cornelius, and his Family, he lets them know, how God anointed JESUS of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost, and with power, who (from that time forwards, not before) went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil 
y Acts 10.38. . In which place, by the anointing with the Holy Ghost, I understand the furnishing of the Man CHRIST JESUS (juxta dispensationem carnis assumptae, as St. jerom hath it) with those gifts and graces of the Spirit, which were requisite and fit to qualify him for the undertaking: By power, the Calling and Authority which that Unction gave him, to preach the Gospel, and do the rest of those good works which properly did pertain to his Ministration. But that both gifts and power were conferred upon him, by the descension of the Spirit at the time of his Baptism, to which St. Peter doth allude; I have Maldonate concurring in opinion with me, saying 
z Maldon. in Luc. 4.18. , Loquitur Petrus de Baptismo Johannis quem Christus susceperat, postquam à Spiritu sancto unctum fuisse significat.  
This Office as our Saviour was pleased to execute in his own Person, as long as he sojourned with us here upon the Earth; so being to withdraw himself from the sight of man, he thought it requisite to make choice of some to be about him, who might both be the witnesses of his Life, and Doctrine, and afterwards discharge so much of the Prophetical Office, as he should please to delegate and entrust unto them. To these he showed himself after his Resurrection, and conversed with them for the space of forty days; to the intent he might the better fit them for so great a work. And being even upon the instant of departing from them, it seemed good to him to invest them with a sacred Power, and by some outward Ceremony and set Form of words, to dedicate them to the Ministry of such holy things, as were not to be meddled with by vulgar hands. He breathed on them (saith the Text) and said unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost 
a John 20.22. . Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them, and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained. The meaning of these words we have shown before, and need repeat no more but this, That in the number of those gifts, whereof the Holy Ghost is Author, there is contained that sacred Power, by which some men are made the Ministers of holy things to the rest of the people. When therefore Christ breathed on his Apostles, and said, Receive the Holy Ghost, he did, as it were, breathe out that power of Preaching the Word of Truth, and doing other holy Offices in the Church of God, which he had formerly received from the Holy Ghost. Receive (said he) the Holy Ghost, i. e. Such a sublime power, as no Prince, nor Potentate can bestow; a power which gives you such an influence on the Souls of men, as that of the remitting and retaining sin. In which it is to be observed, That our Saviour puts not down this act of remitting and retaining sins, for the whole, entire, and adequate subject, about which the Apostolical or Prophetical Office was to be employed; but only as one chief part thereof in the name of all, that by the weightiness of that, they might judge the better of the importance of the other. He had promised them the Keys before 
b Matth. 16.19. , but now he hangs them at their girdle, and puts them absolutely and fully into their possession. Ability and power to perform the rest, they were to tarry for yet a little longer, and then immediately to receive both from the Holy Ghost, whom he did promise to send them after his departure: And so accordingly he did; the Holy Ghost descending on them, upon the tenth day after his Ascension, in the likeness of fiery cloven tongues 
c Acts 2.3. , and furnishing them with all those extraordinary gifts and graces which were necessary for the first propagation of our Saviour's Gospel. By his own breathing on them, and the words that followed, he gave them jus ad rem, as the Lawyers call it, a power to exercise a Spiritual Function in his holy Church, and put them into possession of so much thereof, as concerned the remitting and retaining of sins. But for the jus in re, the actual execution of that holy Function, together with those supernatural endowments, by which they were to be fitted and prepared for it, that they received upon this coming of the Holy Ghost; and did not only receive it, as before from Christ, but repleti sunt omnes, they were all filled with it, saith the Text 
d Ib. v. 4: . This coming of the Holy Ghost, as Pope Leo noteth, Was Cumulans non inchoans, nec novus opere sed dives largitate 
e Leo M. Serm. de Sp. Sanct. , rather by way of augmenting the former power and abilities which Christ had given them, than of beginning a new. For it is a known rule of the Ancient Fathers, That where the Holy Ghost had been given before, and yet is said to come again, it is to be understood either of an increase of the former, in weight or measure, or of some new gift which before men had not, but was conferred after for some new effect; as it is noted out of St. jerom, and S●. Cyril, by our Learned Andrews 
f B. Andr. Serm. 2. on Whitsund. . And to say truth, there was good reason why we must understand this coming of the Holy Ghost, in both these respects, both in regard of measure and addition too. Before, when Christ breathed on them, and therewith said, Receive ye the Holy Ghost, their Ministry was confined within the Land of judea, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, or into any City of the Samaritans, but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel 
g Matth▪ 10.5, 6. . A less proportion of the Spirit would have served for that: But when he was to leave them, he enlarged their bounds, and put the whole world under their jurisdiction, Go, saith he, into all the world, and Preach the Gospel unto every Creature 
h Mark. 16.15. ; Go therefore teach all Nations, as St. Matthew hath it chap. 28.19. And if they were to travel over all the World, and to teach all Nations, good reason they should be enabled to speak the Tongues of all Nations also, and be replenished with so great a measure of the Holy Spirit, as might make the conquest of the world the more easy to them. Which work, as it was wrought in the Feast of Penticost, so hath the anniversary of that day been celebrated ever since in the Christian Church (though under other names, according to the language of particular Countries) as the Birthday of the Gospel of Christ, the day on which it was preached after his Ascension, after the great work of our Redemption was accomplished by him. It had before been kept as a solemn Festival (one of the three great Festivals ordained by Moses) in memory of the giving of the Law, that day, upon Mount Sinai. And hath been since observed as a solemn Festival (one of the three great Festivals of the Christian Church) in memory of the promulgation of the Gospel from Mount Zion, on the same day also. A day it was of so great solemnity, that there were then assembled at jerusalem, of every Nation under heaven, as the Text informs us 
i Acts 2.5. . The Gospel was not to be published but in such a general concourse of people; Therefore the day thereof to be solemnised by all Nations also, and made a day of holy assembly to the Lord our God.  
But our Redeemer stayed not here, as if he had sufficiently discharged his Prophetical Office, by furnishing his Apostles with the Gifts of the Spirit, and meant from henceforth to betake himself to the execution of the Priestly or the Kingly Offices, as being in themselves more glorious, and to him more honourable. When he ascended up on high he led captivity captive, and gave Gifts to men 
k Psal. 68.18. , not unto Twelve alone, which was the number of his Apostles, nor to an hundred and twenty only, which was the whole number of his Disciples 
l Acts 1.15.  at that time. The Harvest being great did require more labourers, and therefore Gifts must be bestowed on more men than so. And if we will believe St. Paul, so it was indeed. For having cited those words of the royal Psalmist, he adds immediately, And he gave some Apostles, and some Prophets, and some Evangelists, and some Pastors, and Teachers 
m Eph. 4.11. ; That is to say, either he gave unto some men such a measure of Gifts, as might fit them to the several Callings which are there enumerated; or else he gave the men so gifted to the use of the Church, and dedicated them, Gifts and all, to the public service. Either or both of these was done, and done unto the end which is after specified 
n Ib. v. 12. , viz. for the perfecting of the Saints, for the work of the Ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ These were the Gifts which Christ conferred upon his Church by the Holy Ghost. First, by his first descent or coming on the feast of Pentecost, when he gave Apostles, Prophets, and Evangelists; and ever since by furnishing the Church with Pastors and Teachers for the work of the Ministry, and fitting them with those Gifts and Graces of the Holy Spirit, which are expedient for their calling. And though St. Paul in this recital doth not speak of Bishops, yet questionless he doth include them in the name of Pastors. For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is used in the original doth signify a Ruler, as well as Pastor; And Christ is called Episcopus & Pastor animarum 
o 1 Pet. 2.25. , the Bishop and Shepherd of our souls, as our English reads it, to show that the Episcopal and Pastoral Office is indeed the same. And this I could make good out of the constant tendry of the Ancient Fathers, had I not handled it already in another place 
p V. Hist. of Episc. l. 1. c. 6. n. 13. . Nor shall I add more here out of that Discourse, but that it is affirmed positively by our learned Andrew's, Apud v●teres Pastorum nomen vix inveniri, nisi cum de Episcopis loquntur 
q Resp. ad Ep. P. Molinaei. , i. e. that the name of Pastors is scarce read amongst the Ancients, but when they have occasion to speak of Bishops. And Binius in his notes upon the Councils excepts against a fragment of the Synod of Rheims, for laying claim to more antiquity than belongs unto it; and that he doth upon this reason, eo quod titulum Pastoris tribuat Paracho 
r Bin. in Concil. To. 3. part. 2. p, 978. , because the Parish Priest there is called Pastor, contrary to the usage of those elder times. But to put the matter out of doubt, though S. Paul doth not speak of Bishops by name in that place of the Ephesians before alleged: yet when he called the Rulers of the Church to appear at Ephesus before him, he doth not only give them the name of Bishops, but saith that they were made Bishops by the Holy Ghost; In quo vos spiritus sanctus posuit Episcopos 
s Acts 20.28. , as all Translations read it, but our English only. Christ did not so desert his Church, as to leave it without Order, and the power of Government; nor hath so laid aside his Prophetical Office, but that as well since his Ascension, as while he sojourned here, on the Earth, amongst us, he is still the chief Pastor and Bishop of our Souls 
t 1 Pet. 2.25. & 5.4. , as St. Peter calls him. Only it pleased him to commit a great part of this care to the managing of the blessed Spirit, whom he promised to send to his Apostles after his departure, to the end, that he might guide them into all truth 
u John 16.13. , and abide with them always to the end. In which respect Tertullian calleth the Holy Ghost, Vicarium Christi, the Vicar or Deputy of Christ, his Usher, as it were, in the great School of the Church 
x Tertul. de Virgin. Veland. ; and doth assign this Office to him, Dirigere, ordinare, & ad perfectam producere disciplinam, that he direct, dispose, and perfect us at the last in all Christian piety. Not that the Holy Ghost doth of himself immediately discharge this duty, but by the Ministry of such men as are called unto it: Whom he co-operates withal, when they Preach the Gospel, by working on the heart, on the inward man, as they upon the understanding by the outward senses. Without the inward operation of the Holy Spirit, the Preaching of the Word would be counted foolishness, and all the eloquent persuasions unto Faith and Piety, which could be uttered by the tongues of Men or Angels, would seem but as tinkling brass, and a sounding cymbal. Without an outward calling to attend this Ministry, Vzzah will press too near the Ark, Uzziah take upon him to burn incense on the Altars of God, and both not draw destruction on their own heads only 
y 2 Sam. 6.7 2 Chro. 26.16. , but prove a stumbling block and scandal to the rest of the people. Not every one which prophesieth in the Name of Christ, or doth pretend in his name to have cast out devils, or done any other wonderful works 
z Matth. 7.22, 23. , shall be acknowledged by him in that terrible day; but he that doth it in that Order, and by those warrantable ways which he hath appointed. Christ must first send them, ere they go upon such an errand, and send them so as he did his Apostles, to Preach the Gospel; first giving them a power to minister the things of God, and then commanding them to go into all the world, to teach all nations. It had not been sufficient for them to pretend a mission, unless they could have shown their commission also; and that they had not, till he pleased to breathe upon them, and said, Receive the Holy Ghost, with the words that follow.  
And so it hath been with the Church in all Ages since. We must receive the Holy Ghost, and be endued with power from above, before we enter on the Ministry in the Church of Christ; and not persuade ourselves to pretend unto some special gifts and illumin●tions, unless we have the Holy Ghost in the sense here spoken of, unless the power which we pretend to be conferred upon us by those hands which have power to give it. Those words, Receive the Holy Ghost, import not the receiving of saving grace, or of inward sanctimony; nor the conferring of such special gifts of the holy Spirit, as after were given to the Apostles for the use of the Church, but the receiving of a power, to execute a Ministry in the Church of Christ; a special and spiritual power in the things of God, and in the dispensation of his heavenly Mysteries. And as they were then used by Christ, at the authorising of his Apostles to Preach the Gospel, so are they still the verba solemnia, the solemn and set form of words, used at the Ordination of all Priests or Presbyters; used anciently in that sacred Ceremony, without any exception, and still retained with us in the Church of England (for I look not on the new Model of Ordination, as a thing in which the Anglican Church is at all concerned) as the very operative words, by which, and by no others of what kind so ever, the order of Priesthood is conferred. And had not those of Rome retained them in their Ordinations, their giving power to offer sacrifice for the quick and the dead, (Accipe potestatem sacrificandi pro vivis & mortuis 
a Pontifical. Roman. ) which new patch they have added to the ancient Formulas, had never made them Priests of the New Testament.  
Of the Authority or Power of remitting sins, we shall speak more appositely hereafter in the following Article. At this time I shall only speak of the Form of words; which some of the pretenders unto Reformation in Queen Elizabeth's time did very much except against, affirming, That to use the words of our Redeemer, and not to give the gifts withal, was nothing but a mere mockery of the Spirit of God, and a ridiculous imitation of our Saviour's actions. But unto this it is replied by Judicious Hooker, that not only the ability of doing miracles, speaking with tongues, curing diseases, and the like, but the authority and power of ministering holy things in the Church of God, is contained in the number of those gifts whereof the Holy Ghost is the Author. And therefore he which gives this power, may say without folly or absurdity, Receive the Holy Ghost, meaning thereby such power as the Spirit of Christ hath pleased to endue his Church withal 
b Hooker Eccl. Pol. l. 5. . And herein he is seconded by that living Magazine of Learning, Bishop Andrews, who reckoneth the Apostleship, or the very office to be a Grace, one of the graces doubtless of the Holy Ghost; such as St. Paul calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The grace (we English it the gift) of ministering unto the Saints 
c Andr. Serm. 9 of the Holy Ghost. , 2 Cor. 8.4. For that the very Office itself is a grace, St. Paul (saith he) avoweth in more places than one, and in particular, Mihi data est haec gratia (according to the gift of the grace of God which is given unto me,) Ephes. 3.7. Where he speaks of his Office, and of nothing else. And such as this, saith he, was the grace here given, of Spiritum called a Spiritual, and of Sanctum an holy Calling; from them derived unto us, by us to be derived on others to the end of the World, and that in the same form of words which our Saviour used.  
For being the especial power, which Christ at that time gave unto his Apostles, consisted in remitting and retaining of sins, and seeing that the same power is given by the Church of Christ, why should not the same words be used as were used at first? why may not the same words be used in conferring this grace of an holy calling, whereby their persons are made public, and their acts authentical, and they enabled to do somewhat about remitting of sins, which is not of the like avail, if done by others, though perhaps more learned than they, and more virtuous too, but have not the like warrant, nor the same accipite, as is conferred in holy Orders? Nor do I utterly deny, but that together with the power, the Holy Ghost doth give some fitness to perform the same; though not in any answerable measure to the first times of the Church, when extraordinary gifts were more necessary than in any time since. For as the ointment which was poured upon Aaron's head, did first fall down upon his Beard, and after on the skirts of his garments also 
d Psal. 133.2. : So we may reasonably believe, That the holy Spirit which descended on the head of Christ, and afterwards on his Apostles, as upon his beard, hath kept some sprinklings also to bestow on us, which are the lowest skirts of his sacred garments. So far we may assuredly persuade ourselves, That the Spirit which calleth men to that holy Function, doth go along with him that is called unto it, for his assistance and support, in whatsoever he shall faithfully do in discharge thereof; and that our acts are so far his, as that, Whether we Preach, Pray, Baptise, Communicate, Condemn, or give Absolution; or in a word, whatsoever we do as the Despensers of God's Mysteries, our Words, Acts, Judgements, are not ours, but the Holy Ghosts. For this I have the testimony of Pope Leo the first, a Learned and Religious Prelate of the Primitive times. Qui mihi oneris est Author, ipse & administrationis est adjutor. Ne magnitudine gratiae (there gratiae is used for the office or calling, as before St. Paul) succumbat infirmus, dabit virtutem qui contulit dignitatem 
e Leo Serm. in Annivers. . Which is in brief, He that hath laid the burden on us, will give strength to bear it. But behold a greater than Pope Leo is here; Behold, (saith Christ to his Apostles) I am with you always to the end of the world 
f Matth. 28.20. ; that is to say, Cum vobis & successoribus vestris, as Denys the Carthusian rightly 
g Carthus. in Matth. 28. , with you and your Successors in the Work of the Ministry, to guide them and assist them by his holy Spirit. And when he said unto them upon other occasions, He that heareth you, heareth me 
h Luke 10. 1●. ; and whatsoever ye bind on Earth, should be bound in Heaven 
i Matth. 16.19. ; Did he not thereby promise so to own their actions, that whatsoever they should say, or do, in order to the propagation of his Gospel, and the edification of his Church, should be esteemed as his act? his act by whose authority and power it is said or done.  
But the assisting of the Church and Ministers thereof, with his Power and Spirit, is not the only public benefit, though it be the greatest, which it receiveth immediately from the Holy Ghost. Without some certain standing Rule, by which the Ministers of the Gospel were to frame their doctrine, and the rest of the people guide their paths in the way of godliness, both Priest and People would be apt to pretend new Lights, and following such ignes fatui as they saw before them, be drawn into destruction both of body and soul. And on the other side, Tradition hath been always found to be so untrusty in the conveyance of Gods will and pleasure to the ears of his people; that in small tract of time, the Law of God became obliterated in the hearts of men, the righteous Seed degenerating after carnal lusts 
k Gen. 6.2. , and Abraham 
l Josh. 24.2.  himself serving other gods, for want of a more certain rule to direct their actions. Therefore to take away all excuse from back-sliding men, it pleased God first to commit his Law to writing, the Two Tables only; and afterwards to inspire many holy Men with the Spirit of Wisdom, Power, and Knowledge, to serve as Commentators on that sacred Text; whose Prophecies, Reproofs, and Admonitions, being put into their mouths by the Holy Ghost, (for 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 
m 2 Pet. 4.1, 2. , as St. Peter hath it.) So by direction of the same Spirit, were they put into writing. Propter vivendi exemplum libros ad nostram etiam memoriam transmiserunt, in the words of jerom 
n jerom. . The Lord himself did on Mount Sinai give the Law, the very Letter: The Prophets and other holy Men of God, being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, especially inspired to that end and purpose, did compose the Comment. By the same Spirit were the Evangelists and Apostles guided, when they committed unto writing the most glorious Gospel, and other the Records and Monuments of the Christian Faith. The first of the Evangelical Scriptures was the Epistle Decretory which we find in the fifteenth of the Acts; and that was countenanced by a visum est spiritui sancto, i. e. It seemed good to the Holy Ghost. And when St. Paul writ his Epistle unto those of Corinth, for fear he might be thought by that factious people, to enjoin any thing upon them without very good warrant, he vouched the Spirit of God for his Author in it 
o 1 Cor. 7.40. . They preached the Gospel first to others, as Christ did to them, by word of mouth, that being the more speedy way to promote the Work: But being they could not live to the end of the world, and that the purest waters will corrupt at last, by passing through muddy or polluted Channels, they thought it best to leave so much thereof in writing, as might serve in all succeeding Ages for the Rule of Faith. Postea vero per voluntatem Dei, in Scriptures nobis Evangelium tradiderunt, firmamentum & columnam fidei nostrae futuram 
p Irenaeus adv. haeres. , as in Irenaeus. A man might marvel why St. john should give that testimony to the Gospel which was writ by him, that it was written to the end, That men might believe that JESUS is the CHRIST, the Son of God; and that believing, they might have Faith through his Name 
q John 20.31. ; considering that none of the rest of the Evangelists say the like of theirs; or why he thundered at the end of his Revelation that most fearful curse, against all those who should presume to add anything to the words of that Book, or take any thing from it 
r Apoc. 22.18, 19 ; being a course that none of all the sacred Penmen had took but he. But when I call to mind the Spirit, by which john was guided, and the time in which those Books of his were first put in writing; methinks, the marvel is took off without more ado. For seeing that his Gospel was writ after all the rest, as is generally affirmed by all the Ancients, those words relate not, as I guess, to his own Book only, but to the whole Body of the Evangelical History, now perfectly composed and finished; for otherwise, how impertinent had it been for him to say, That JESUS did many other signs in the presence of his Disciples, which were not written in that Book 
s john 20.30. , if he had spoken those words of his own Book only: Considering, that he had neither written of the signs done in the way to Emaus, mentioned by St. Luke; or his appearing to the eleven in a Mountain of Galilee, which St. Matthew speaks of; or his Ascension into Heaven, which St. Mark relateth, which every vulgar Reader could not choose but know? The like I do conceive of those words of his in the Revelation, viz. That they relate not to that Book alone, but to the whole body of the Bible: St. john being the Survivor of that glorious company, on whom the Holy Ghost descended in the Feast of Pentecost; and the Apocalypse the last of those Sacred Volumes which were dictated by the Spirit of God, for the use of his Church, and now make up the Body of the holy Scriptures.  
God had now said as much by the mouths and pens of the Prophets, Evangelists, and Apostles, as he conceived sufficient for our salvation; and so closed up the Canon of the Scriptures, as St. Augustine telleth, Deus quantum satis esse judicavit, locutus, Scripturam condidit 
t August. de civet dei. l. 11.3. , as his own words are; which certainly God had not done, nor the Evangelist declared, nor St. Augustine said, had not the Scripture been a sufficient rule, able to make us wise unto salvation, and thoroughly furnished unto all good works.  
Which being so, it cannot but be a great dishonour to the Scripture, and consequently to the Spirit of God, who is Author of it, to have it called as many of the Papists do, Atramentariam Scripturam, Plumbeam Regulam, Literam Mortuam; that is to say, An Ink-horn Text, a Leaden Rule, and a Dead Letter, (Pighius for one 
u Pighius Hier. lib. 1. c. 1. & Controu. 3. , as I remember, gives it all these Titles;) or to affirm, That it hath no authority in the Church of Christ, but what it borroweth from the Pope, without whose approbation, it were scarce more estimable than the Fables of Aesop; which was one of the blasphemous speeches of Wolf Hermannus 
x Hosius de Script. Author. l. 3. , or that is not a sufficient means to gain Souls to Christ, or to instruct the Church in all duties necessary to salvation, without the adding of Traditional Doctrines, neither in terminis extant in the Book of God, nor yet derived from thence by good Logical inference, which is the general Tenet of the Church of Rome; or that to make the Canon of the Scripture complete and absolute, the Church, as it hath added to it already the Apocryphal Writings, so may it add and authorise for the Word of God, the Decretals of the Ancient Popes, and their own Canon Law, as some of the Professors of it have not sticked to say 
y Distinct. 19 in Canon. & Gloss. . So strongly are they biased with their private interess, and a desire of carrying on their faction in the Church of Christ, as to place the holy Spirit, where he doth not move, in their Traditions, in Apocryphal, and mere Humane writings, and not to see and honour him, where indeed he is, in the holy Scriptures. Of the Authority, Sufficiency, and Perspicuity of which holy Scriptures, I do not purpose at the present any debate. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
z Arist. Eth. l. 1. . It is a work more fit for another place, and such, as of itself would require a Volume; only I say, that if the written Word be no rule at all, but as it hath authority from the Church, which it is to direct; and then, not an entire, but a partial rule, like a Noun Adjective in Grammar, which cannot stand by itself, but requireth somewhat else to be joined with it in Construction; and that too, so obscure and difficult, that men of ordinary wits cannot profit by it, and therefore must not be permitted to consult the same; the Holy Ghost might very well have spared his pains of speaking by the Prophets in the time of the Law, or guiding the pens of the Apostles in the time of the Gospel; and the great Body of the Scripture had been the most impertinent, and imperfect piece, the most unable to attain to the end it aims at, that was ever writ in any Science, since the world began. Which what an horrid blasphemy it must needs be thought, against the majesty and wisdom of the holy Spirit, let any sober Christian judge. And yet as horrid as those blasphemies may be thought to be, some of the most professed enemies of the Church of Rome, and such as think, that the further they depart from Rome, they are the nearer to Christ, have fallen upon the like, if not worse extravagancies. For to say nothing of the Anabaptists, and that new brood of Sectaries, which now swarms amongst us, whom I look on only as a company of Fanatical Spirits; did not Cartwright, and the rest of our new Reformers in Queen Elizabeth's time, say as much as this? The Scriptures say the Papists in their Council of Trent (for I regard not the unsavoury Speeches of particular men) Is not sufficient to Salvation without Traditions, that is to say, without such unwritten Doctrinals, as have from hand to hand been delivered to us: Said not the Puritans the same, when they affirmed, That Preaching only viva voce, which is verbum traditum, is able to convert the sinner 
a V. Hooker Eccles. Polit. l. 5. : That the Word sermonized, not written, is alone the food which nourisheth to life eternal; that reading of the Word of God is of no greater power to bring men to Heaven, than studying of the Book of Nature; that the Word written, was written to no other end, but to afford some Texts and Topics for the Preachers descant. If so, as so they say it is, then is the written word no better than an Ink-horn Scripture, a Dead Letter, or a Leaden Rule, and whatsoever else the Papists, in the height of scorn, have been pleased to call it. Nay of the two, these last have more detracted from the perfection and sufficiency of the holy Scripture, than the others did. They only did decree in the Council of Trent, That Traditions were to be received, Paripietatis affectu 
b Concil. Trident. Sess. 2. , with equal Reverence and Affection to the written Word, and proceed no further; These magnify their verbum traditum so much above it, that in comparison thereof, the Scripture is God's Word in name, but not in efficacy. They only add Traditions in the way of Supplement, where they conceive the Scriptures to be defective; These make the Scriptures every where deficient to the work intended, unless the Preacher do inspire them with a better Spirit, than that which they received from the Holy Ghost. Good God▪ that the same breath should blow so hot upon the Papists, and yet so cold upon the Scriptures; that the same men who so much blame the Church of Rome, for derogating from the dignity and perfection of the Holy Scriptures, should yet prefer their own indigested crudities (in the way of Salvation) before the most divine dictates of the Word of God. But such are men, when they leave off the conduct of the Holy Ghost, to follow the delusions of a private Spirit.    

Articuli IX. Pars Secunda. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (i. e.) Sanctam Ecclesiam Catholicam. (i. e.) The Holy Catholic Church.  

CHAP. II. Of the name and definition of the Church. Of the Title of Catholic. The Church, in what respects called Holy. Touching the Head and Members of it. The Government thereof Aristocratical.  
IN the same Article in which we testify our Faith in the Holy Ghost, do we acknowledge, That there is a Body or Society of faithful people, which being animated by the power of that Blessed Spirit, hath gained unto itself the name of the Church; and with that name, the attribute or title of Catholic, in regard of the extent thereof over all the World; of Holy, in relation to that piety of life and manners, which is or aught to be in each several Member. And not unfitly are they joined together in the self same Article; the Holy Ghost being given to the Apostles for the use of the Church, and the Church nothing but a dead and lifeless carcase, without the powerful influence of the Holy Ghost. As is the Soul in the Body of Man, so is the Holy Ghost in the Church of Christ; that which first gives it life, that it may have a Being, and afterward preserves it from the danger of putrefaction; into which it would otherwise fall in small tract of time.  
Having therefore spoken in the former Chapter of the Nature, Property, and Office of the Holy Ghost; and therein also of the Volume of the Book of God, dictated by that Blessed Spirit, for that constant Rule by which the Church was to be guided, both in Life and Doctrine; We now proceed in order to the Church itself, so guided and directed by it.  
And first for the Quid nominis, to begin with that, it is a name not found in all the writings of the Old Testament; in which, the body of God's people, the Spiritual body, is represented to us after a figurative manner of Speech, in the names of Zion and jerusalem; as, Pray for the peace of Jerusalem, Psal. 121. And the Lord loveth the gates of Zion, Psal. 87. The name of Church occurreth not till the time of the Gospel, and then it was imposed by him who had power to call it what he pleased, and to entitle it by a name which was fittest for it. The Disciples gave themselves the name of Christians, the name of Church was given them by our Saviour Christ No sooner had St. Peter made this confession for himself, and the rest of the Apostles, Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God 
a Matth. 16.16. ; but presently our Saviour added, Upon this Rock, that is to say, The Rock of this Confession (as most of the Ancients 
b August. Ser. 23. ●e verbis domini. Cyril. de Trin. l. 4. Hilar. de Trin. l. 2. Eucher. in Homil. in Natal. S. Petr. Lyra in Matth. 16. Gloss. Interlin. ibid. Marsil. in defensor. Pacis. Petrus de Alliaco, the Glos● on Gratian, etc. , and some Writers also of the darker times, do expound the same) will I build my Church. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, saith the Greek. The word used by our Lord and Saviour, is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; whence the Latins borrowed their Ecclesia, the French their Eglise, and signifieth Coetum evocatum, a chosen or selected company, a company chosen out of others; derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is as much as evocare, to call out or segregate. In that sense, as the word is used to signify a company of men called by the special Grace to the Faith in Christ, and to the hopes of life eternal, by his death and passion; is the word Ecclesia taken in the writings of the holy Apostles, and in most Christian Authors, since the times they lived in, though with some difference (or variety rather) in the application to their purposes. But anciently it was of a larger extent by far, and signified any Public meeting of Citizens, for the dispatch of business and affairs of State; For so Thucydides, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
c Thucid. hist. l. 1. , i. e. That the Assembly being form, the different parties fell upon their disputes; and so doth Aristophanes use it, in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
d Arist. in Acharnens. , i. e. That the people should now give the Thracians a Public meeting in their Guildhall or Common forum of the City. St. Luke, who understood the true propriety, as well as the best Critic of them all, gives it in this sense also, Acts 19.32. where speaking of the tumult which was raised at Ephesus, he telleth us, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, That the Assembly was confused. And in the 26. Psal. Ecclesia malignantium, is used for the Congregation of ungodly men.  

APPLICATION.  
BUt after Christ had given this name unto the Body of the Faithful which confessed his Name; and the Apostles in their writings had applied it so, as to make it a word of Ecclesiastical use and notion, the Fathers in the following Ages did so appropriate the same to the state of the Gospel, as by no means to let it be accommodated to the times of the Law. That by a name distinct, they have called the Synagogue. Synagoga judaeorum, Ecclesia Christianorum est 
e August. in Psal. 77. , as St. Augustine hath it. And the distinction may sort well enough with the state of the Church, as it stood heretofore in the time of the Law, and now under the Gospel, though otherwise the names may be used promiscuously. For properly Synagogue is no other than a Congregation, derived from the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which signifieth to congregate, or gather together into one; and the other in one word may be rendered a Convocation, from calling the same men together, to some certain end. Both words of Ecclesiastical use and notion, and both import the same thing, though in divers words: For both the Patriarches and other holy Men of God which lived under the Law, may be called a Church, that is to say, a Convocation, a Body Collective of men called by their God unto a participation of his Word and Ordinances; And we which have the happiness to live under the Gospel, may without any reproach or dishonour to us, be called by the name of the Congregation. Certain I am, St. Augustine, though much affected with the foresaid distinction, doth yet allow the one to be called a Church; Tamen & illam dictam invenimus eccles●am 
f Id. ibid. , as his words there are; and no less sure, that the meetings of Christ's faithful Servants are by St. Paul called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
g Heb 10.25. , i. e. A Congregation or gathering of themselves together; as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a word of the same Root and Origination, is used by him to the same purpose in another place 
h 1 Cor. 5.5. . And yet I can by no means like the zeal of our first Translators, who were it seems so out of love with the name of Church, that wheresoever they found the word Ecclesia in Greek or Latin (for I know not which of the two they consulted with) they would not render it the Church, but the Congregation: And so it stands still in the Epistles and Gospels, and several other passages of our Public Liturgy, which were taken out of that Translation. A thing which Gregory Martin justly doth except against 
i Greg. Mart. against the English Translation. , though he be out himself, in saying, That the Apostles never called the Church by the name of the Congregation. But that Error is corrected in our late Translations, and we are now no more afraid of the name of the Church, than the Romanists are afraid of the name of Pope. Audito Ecclesiae nomine hostis expalluit 
k Campian. in decem. Ration. , was a vain brag in Campians mouth, when the times were queasiest; more ayt to strain at Gnats, than they have been since. Much less can I approve of that false Collection, which those of Rome have made from St. Augustine's words. For whereas he appropriating the name of Synagogue to the state of the jews, and that of the Church, unto the Christians; inserts, I know not why, this Grammatical note, Congregatio magis pecorum, convocatio magis hominum intelligi solet 
l August. in Psal. 77. , That to be convocated or called together doth belong to Men, but to be congregated or gathered together appertains to Beasts; the Authors of the Roman Catechism have from thence collected, That the people under the Law, were called a Synagogue, because like brute Beasts they sought after nothing but temporal and earthly pleasures, not being nourished in the hopes of eternal life 
m Catechism. Trident. in explic. Symb. . The vanity of this Collection we have shown before, by bringing in St. Paul to witness how properly the word Congregation (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek) may be applied and understood of the Church of Christ. The falsehood of the Tenet we shall show hereafter, when we are come to speak of the last Article, that of Life Everlasting. In the mean time the scornful Papist may be pleased to be put in mind, that there is nothing more frequent in the Acts of the Council of Constance, than Synodus in Spiritu Sancto congregata; and yet I know they neither have the confidence, nor the heart to say, That the Bishops which were there assembled, were gathered together like brute Beasts, which Congregari doth import in the Tridentine Criticism.  
Of the Quid nominis, the name or notion of the Church, as it is called Ecclesia, both in Greek and Latin, we have said enough. Our English word Church hath another Root, and is derived from the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which in the proper signification of it, doth signify God's house, the material Church, the place appointed for the Meetings of Christian people, to celebrate the Name of the Lord their God. So witnesseth Eusebius, saying, That in as much as the Holy Houses and Temples of that time were dedicated unto God, the chief Lord of all; therefore they did receive his Name, and were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (Dominicae in the Latin Tongue) that is, the Houses of the Lord 
n Euseb. de Laud. Constantin. . A name, saith he, imposed upon them, not by the will of man, but the Lord himself. In correspondence to the Greek, they were called Dominica in the Latin, and called so very early too, in St. Cyprians time, as appears by his reproof of a wealthy widow, of whom he saith, In Dominicum sine sacrificio Venice 
o Cypr. de pietat. & El●●mosyn. , That she used to come into the Church without her Offering. Of this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as that famous Antiquary Sir Henry Spelman hath right well observed, came the Saxon Cyric, or Kirk 
p Spelm. Glossar. , (which still the Scots retain without alteration;) which we by adding thereunto a double Aspirate, have changed or mollified into Church. A name, which though at first, it signified the Material Temple, (I mean, the place of meeting for God's Public Worship) yet came it easily to be applied to the Body Mystical, to the Spiritual Temple, built on the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles, JESUS CHRIST himself being the chief corner stone. As on the otherside, the word Ecclesia, which first the Christians used to signify the Spiritual Temple, the Collective Body of God's people, became in little time to denote the building, the material edifice, appointed for the meeting of the Congregation. Tertullian hath it in this sense, for the African Churches, Conveniunt in ecclesiam, & confugiunt in ecclesiam 
q Tertul. de fuga in persecur. , They met together in the Church, and they fled to the Church. So hath St. Jerome for the Roman, Aedificate ecclesias expensis publicis 
r jerom. in Isa. cap. 60. , Let Churches be erected at the Public charge. And for the Eastern, thus the Synod of Laodicea, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
s Synod. L●odic. 304. , i. e. In the Church of the most holy Martyr Euphemia.  
Many more instances of which kind might be here alleged, but that St. Paul is generally supposed by all sorts of Writers, to speak of the Material Church, when he charged those of Corinth for despising the Church of God 
t 1 Cor. 11.12. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, saith the Greek Original. Concerning which consult St. August. quaest. 57 super Levit. St. Basil. in Moral. Reg. 30. And in his Regulae Compend. Respons. 310. St. jerom in 1 Cor. St. Chrysostom also on the place; Theodoret, Theophylact, and Oecumenius, on the same Text also. Nor is the word so used only in the best Christian Writers, but did admit also of the same signification amongst the best learned, and most critical of the Heathen Greeks: Of whom take Lucian for a taste, who speaking of the adorning of the Court or Senate-house, expresseth the place itself by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which cannot possibly be meant of the men that met, but of the place of the Assembly. A thing which here I had not noted, because not pertinent to the sense of the present Article, but only to encounter with the peevish humour of our Modern Sectaries, who will by no means yet yield the name of Churches to those sacred places, but call them Steeple-houses in the way of scorn.  
But to proceed, the word Ecclesia, or Church, in the Genuine sense, as it denotes the Body Collective of God's Servants, since the coming of Christ, is variously taken in the Book of God, and also in the Writings of the purest times. For first, it signifieth a particular Congregation of men assembled together, in some certain and determinate place, for God's public service. In this sense it is taken in those several Texts, where St. Paul speaketh of the Church in the house of Nymphas, Col. 4.15. To the Church in the house of Philemon, Vers. 5. The Church which was in the house of Aquila and Priscilla, Rom. 16. and 1 Cor. 16.19. I know that this is commonly expounded of their private Families, as if the house and family of each Faithful Christian, were in St. Paul's esteem reputed for a Church of Christ But herein I prefer Mr. Medes opinion before all men else, who understands those words of the Congregation of Saints, which were wont to assemble at such houses for the performance of Divine Duties 
u Mede of Churches, p. 20. ; it being not unusual with some principal Christians, in those early days, to dedicate or set apart some private place within their own houses, for the residue of the Church to assemble in. And this he proveth, first from the singularity of the expression, which must needs include somewhat more than ordinary, somewhat which was not common to the rest of the Saints, whom St. Paul salutes in his Epistles. For in so large a Bedrol as is made in the last to the Romans, it is very probable that many, if not most of them, were Masters of Families; and then must all their Families be Churches too, as well as that of Aquila and Priscilla, or else we must find some other meaning of the words, than that which hath hitherto been delivered. Secondly, Had St. Paul intended by those words, The Church which is in their house, nothing but the Family of Nymphas, Philemon, and the rest, we should have found it put in the same expression which he doth elsewhere use on the same occasion; as viz. The household of Aristobulus, the household of Narcissus, Rom. 16.10, 11. The household of Onesiphorus, 2 Tim. 4.19. Patrobas, Hermes, and the Brethren which are with them, Rom. 16.14. Nereus and Olympas, and all the Saints which are with them, Vers. 15. The difference of expressions makes a different case of it, and plainly doth conclude in my apprehension, That by the Church in such an house, the Apostle meaneth, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The Church assembled at such houses, as he there expounds it. And though he cite no ancient Author to confirm him in this opinion, but Oecumenius (and he none of the ancientest neither:) Yet in a matter of this nature, I may say of him, as Maldonat doth of Euthymius in a greater point, whose single judgement he preferreth before all the rest of the Fathers, viz. Quem minorem licet & solum autorem, verisimilia tamen dicentem, quam plures majoresque illos sequi malo 
x Maldonat. in Luc. 1. .  
But to proceed unto the other acceptions of the word Ecclesia, it is also used to signify in holy Scripture, The Church of some City, with the Region or Country round about it, a National or Provincial Church, under the Government of one, or many Bishops, and subordinate Ministers; as the Churches of the Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Thessalonians, Romans, and the rest mentioned in the Acts, and St. Paul's Epistles. Thirdly, It is also used to signify not the Church itself, or the whole Body of the people of a City or Province, agreeing in the Faith of Christ; but for the principal Officers and Rulers of it, such as possess the place of judicature in the Court, or Consistory. In this sense it is used in the 18 of Matthew, where the party wronged, and able to get no remedy otherwise, is willed by Christ, to tell the Church 
y Matth. 18.17. ; that is to say, to make his complaint to them, who having the chief place and power in Spiritual matters, are able to compel the wrongdoer to make satisfaction, by menacing and inflicting the Church's Censures. Tell the Church, That is, saith Chrysostom 
z Chrysost. in Matth. 18. , the Prelates and Pastors of the Church, who have the power of binding and losing such offenders, which is mentioned in the verse next following. And in this sense, the name of Church became appropriated to the Clergy in the latter times, and hath been used to signify the State Ecclesiastic; (Ecclesiae nomen ad Clerum solere restringi, as Gerson 
a Gerson de Relig. protect. Consid 3.  noted in his time, not without regret) as being men most versed in the Church affairs. And lastly, it is used for the Body Collective or Diffusive of the people of God, made up of several Congregations, States, and Nations, consisting both of Priests and People, of men as well under, as in Authority. In this respect, Christ is said to be the head of the Church, Eph. 5.23. The husband of the Church, V. 32. To love his Church, and to give himself for his Church, V. 25. That is to say, not only of a National or Provincial Church, and much less of a Congregational only, but of the Universal Church, which consists of all, dispersed and distressed over all the World. And this we do define to be the whole Congregation of Christian people called by the grace and goodness of Almighty God, to a participation of his Word and Sacraments, and other outward means of eternal life.  
This Universal Church being thus found out, is represented to us in the present Article by two marks or characters, by which she is to be discerned from such Public meetings, which otherwise might claim that title. Of which, the one denotes the generality of extent and latitude, and is that of Catholic; by which it is distinguished from the jewish Synagogue, being shut up in the bounds of that Country only; and from the private Conventicles of Schismatical persons: The other doth express the quality of the whole compositum, by the piety and integrity of its several members, and is that of Holy; by which it is distinguished from the Assemblies of ungodly men, from the Ecclesia malignantium, as the Psalmist calls it.  
Or, if you will, we may by these behold the Church in her chief ingredients, which are the sanctimony of life and conversation; it is an holy Church; and the integrity of her doctrine, free from all Heresy and Error, in the title Catholic: For the word Catholic is not only used to signify Universality of extent, but purity of doctrine also: The first in the natural, the second in the borrowed sense of the word.  
In the first sense, the Church is called Catholic in respect of place; Thou hast redeemed us by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation 
b Apocal. 5.9. . To which acordeth that of an Ancient writer, saying, Ab ortu solis ad occasum lex Christiana suscepta est 
c Lactant. l. , That the Gospel of Christ had been admitted from the rising of the Sun, to the setting of it; that is to say, In all parts of the world. And it is called Catholic too in respect of persons, who are promiscuously and indefinitely called to the knowledge of Christ, In whom there is neither jew nor Gentile, bond nor free, male nor female 
d Gal. 3.28.  but all called alike. And so Lactantius telleth us also, Universos homines sine discrimine sexus vel aetatis 
e Lactant. Inst. l. 1. c. , (Minutius adds, Aut dignitatis 
f Minut. Fel. in Octavio. ,) ad coeleste pabulum convocamus. Lastly, it hath the name of Catholic in respect of times, as comprehending all the faithful since our Saviour's days, unto the age in which we live, and to continue from henceforth to the end of the world: Of which duration or extent of the Church of Christ, the Angel Gabriel did foresignify to his Virgin-mother, that he should reign in the house of Jacob for ever, and of his Kingdom there should be no end 
g Luk. 1.33. . And in this sense, it doth not only include that part of the Church which is now Militant on the Earth, but also that which is Triumphant in the Heaven of Glories. Both they with us, and we with them, make but one Body Mystical, whereof Christ is Head; and all together, together with the Ancient Patriarcks, and other holy men of God which lived under the Law, shall make up that one glorious Church, which is entitled in the Scriptures, The general Assembly, the Church of the firstborn, whose names are written in the Heavens 
h Heb. 12.23. . For the better clearing of which Union or Concorporation, which is between these different Members of the Body Mystical, the Fathers of the Constantinopolitan Council added the word One unto the Article, reading it thus, And I believe one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. Catholic then the Church may be rightly called in regard to extent, whether it do refer to time, place, or persons; and it is called Catholic too in respect of Doctrine, with reference to the same extensions; that being the true Catholic Doctrine of the Church of Christ, Quae semper, quae ubique, quae ab omnibus credita est 
i Lerinens. adv. haer●s. c. 3. , which hath always, and in every place been received as Orthodox, and that too, by all manner of men, according to the Golden Rule of Lerinensis. Catholic in this sense, is the same with Orthodox, a Catholic Christian just the same with a true Professor; by which the Doctrine is distinguished from Heretical, and the men from Heretics. justinian in the Code, doth apply it so. Omnes hanc legem sequentes Christianorum Catholicorum nomen jubemus amplecti 
k Cod. justin. Tit. de St. Trinit. & fide Cathol. . That for the persons, the Professors; it followeth after for the Doctrine, Is autem Nicenae adsertor fidei & Catholicae Religionis verus cultor accipiendus est, etc. A National or Topical Church may be called Catholic in this sense, and are often times entitled so in Ecclesiastical Authors. For Constantine the Emperor writing to the Alexandrians, superscribed his Letters in this form, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
l Socrat. Eccles. hist. l. 2. c. 2. , i. e. To the Catholic Church of Alexandria. And Gregory Nazianzen (being then Bishop of Constantinople) calls himself in his last Will and Testament 
m Ext. ap. Barn. Brisson. Formul. l. 7. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. e. The Bishop of the Catholic Church in the City of Constantine.  
Of this word Catholic in this sense, there hath been different use made, as the times have varied. The Fathers of the purest times, made use of it to distinguish themselves from Heretics, according to that so celebrated saying of Pacianus. Christianus mihi nomen est, Catholicus cognomen 
n Pacian. in Biblioth. Patrum. , Christian (saith he) is my name, and Catholic my surname; by the one I am known from Infidels, by the other from Heretics. And so long as the main body of Christianity retained the form of wholesome words, and kept the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace, it served exceeding fitly for a mark distinctive, to known an Orthodox Professor from those who followed after Heretical and Schismatical Factions. But when the main Body of the Church was once torn in pieces, and every leading faction would be thought the true Church of Christ, they took unto themselves the names of Catholics also, as if the truth was not more Orthodoxly held by the soundest Christians, than it was by them.  
And this hath been a device so stale and common, that the Nestorians in the East (though anciently condemned for Heretics in the Third General Council) do call their Patriarch by the name of Catholic▪ (that is to say, The Catholic or Orthodox Bishop) as Leunclavius telleth us very rightly 
o Leunclav. Pandect. Turcic. sect. 3. ; not jacelich, as the Copies of Brochardus 
p Brochard. in descr. terr. Sanct. , and Paulus Venetus 
q Paul. Venet. hist. l. 1. c. 15. , do corruptly read it. In the same Error are our great Masters in the Church of Rome, who having appropriated to themselves the name of Catholics, and counting all men Heretics but themselves alone: First, cast all others out of the Church by the name of Heretics, who do not hold communion with them in their sins and errors; and then defend themselves by the name of Catholics, from having dealt unjustly with their Fellow-Christians, men every way more Orthodox than they be themselves. Just so the Collier justified himself for a true Believer, because he believed as the Church believed, though he knew not the doctrine of the Church; and the Church believed as he believed, though the Church troubled not itself about his opinions. I know the great Cardinal presumes very much on the name of Catholic, making it to be one of the signs of the true Church now, because an adjunct of the true Church in the Primitive times 
r Bellar. de notis Eccles. l. 4 c. 4. . And wonder it is, that we are grown so prodigal of late, as to give it to them. A courtesy which they receive with a great deal of joy, and turn the bare acknowledgement to their great advantage; there being no Argument more convincing than that which is drawn from the confession of an adversary. Upon this ground doth Barclay build his Triumph for the cause of Rome. Adeo probanda est ecclesia nostra à nomine Catholicae, quod extorquet etiam ab invitis hareticis 
s Barclay. Paren. ad Scot , as he brags it there. For my part, as I never gave it them in writing, nor in common speech, as thinking it a greater condemnation to ourselves, than men were aware of: So could I wish the like Caution in all others also, lest unawares they utterly exclude themselves out of Christianity. For as Pope Gregory the first said unto some of the Bishops of his time, concerning the Patriarch of Constantinople, who had then took unto himself the title of Ecumenical or Universal Bishop, viz. Si ille universalis (or which is the same, Catholicus) est, restat ut vos non sitis Episcopi 
t Greg. Magn. l. 7. Epl. 170. ; so may we also say in the present case, if we once grant them to be Catholick●, we thereby do conclude ourselves to be no Christians, or at best but Heretics.  
Christian, perhaps they have no fancy to be called; the name of Christian in most parts of Italy, being grown so despicable, that Fool and Christian in a manner are become Synonyma. Italico Idiomate per Christianum hominem stupidum & stolidum solent intelligere, as Hospinian tells us from the mouth of one Christian Franken 
u Hospin. de Orig. Mona●hat. , who had lived amongst them. Since then, they have no mind to be called Christians, nor reason to be called Catholics; let us call them, as they are, by the name of Papists, considering their dependence on the Pope's decision for all points of Faith. And possibly we may gratify them as much in this, as if we did permit them the name of Catholics. For Bellarmine seems very much delighted with the Appellation, flattering himself, that he can bring in Christ, our most blessed Saviour within the Catalogue of Popes 
x Bellar. de not. Eccl. l. 4. c. 4. ; and that he hath found a Prophecy in St. Chrysostom to this effect, Quandoque nos Papistas vocandos esse, That Papist in the times then following, should be the stile and title of a true Professor. Great pity it is, but he, and his should have the honour of their own discovery, and Papists let them be since the same so pleaseth.  
Now as the Papists make ill use of the name of Catholic, so do their opposite faction in the Church of Christ, conclude as falsely and erroneously from the title of Holy. The Church is called Holy, and is called so justly, because it trains men up in the ways of godliness; because it is so in its most eminent and more noble parts, whom God hath sanctified by the Graces of his holy Spirit; and finally, because redeemed by the blood of Christ, to the intent, that all the faithful Members of it, being by him delivered from the hands of their enemies 
y Luk. 1.74, 75. , might serve him without fear in righteousness and holiness, all the days of their lives. Not holy in the sense of Corah, and his factious complices, who made all the Congregation holy 
z Numb. 16.3: , and all holy alike; nor holy in the sense of some Ancient and Modern Sectary, who fancy to themselves a Church without spot or wrinkle; a Church wherein there are no vessels of wrath, but election only; and where they find not such a Church, they desert it instantly, for fear they should partake of the sins and wickednesses, which they observe to be in some Members of it. Our Saviour Christ, who better knew the temper of his Church than so, compares the same in holy Scripture to a threshing floor 
a Matth. 3.12. , in which there is both Wheat and chaff; and to a fold, wherein there are both Sheep and Goats 
b & 25.33. ; and to a casting net, which being thrown into the Sea, drew up all kind of Fishes, both good and bad 
c & 13.17. ; and to an house, in which there are not only vessels of honour, as Gold and Silver, but also of dishonour, and for unclean uses 
d 2 Tim. 2.20. ; and to a field, in which, besides the good Seed, which the Lord had sown 
e Matth. 13.25. , Infelix lolium, & steriles dominantur avenae, the enemy had sowed his Tares. In all and every one of which heavenly Parables, our Saviour represented unto his Disciples, and in them to us, the true condition of his Church, to the end of the world; in which, the wicked person, and the righteous man are so intermingled, that there is no perfection to be looked for here: In which, erroneous doctrines are so mixed with truth, that it can never be so perfectly reserved and purified, but errors and corruptions will break out upon it. Perplexae sunt istae duae civitates in hoc seculo, invicemque permistae, saith the great St. Augustine 
f August. de Civit. Dei l. 1. . The City of the Lord, and the City of Satan, are so intermingled in this world, that there is little hope to see them separated till the day of judgement. Though the foundation of the Church be of precious stones 
g 1 Cor. 3.12. , yet there is wood, and hay, and stubble, in her superstructures; and those so interwoven, and built up together, that nothing but a fatal fire is of power to part them; I mean, the fire of conflagration, not of Popish Purgatory. Were it not thus, we need not pray to God for the good estate of the Church Militant here on Earth; but glory as in the Triumphant, as they do in Heaven. And yet the Church is counted Holy, and called Catholic still, this intermixture notwithstanding. Catholic in regard of time, place, and persons, in, and by which the Gospel of our Saviour Christ is professed and propagated: Holy, secundùm nobiliores ejus parts, in reference to the Saints departed, and those who are most eminent for grace and piety. And it is called Ecclesia una, one holy Catholic▪ and Apostolic Church, though part thereof be Militant here upon the Earth, and part Triumphant in the Heavens: The same one Church in this World, and in that ●o come.  
The difference is, that here it is imperfect, mixed of good and bad; there perfect, and consisting of the righteous only. Accordingly it is determined by St. Augustine 
h August. Col. cont. Donatist. , Eandem ipsam unam & Sanctam Ecclesiam, nunc habere malos mixtos, tunc non habituram. For then, and not till then, as jerom, Augustine, and others do expound the place, shall Christ present her to himself a most glorious Church, without spot or wrinkle; and marry her to himself for ever. Till that day come, it is not to be hoped or looked for, but that many Hypocrites, False Teachers, and Licentious livers, will shroud themselves under the shelter of the Church, and pass for Members of it in the eye of men, though not accounted such in the sight of God. The eye of man can possibly discern no further than the outward show, and mark who join themselves to the Congregation, to hear the Word of God, and receive his Sacraments. Dominus novit qui sunt sui 
l 2 Tim. 2.19. ; The Lord knows only who are his, and who are those occulti intus, whose hearts stand fast in his Commandments, and carefully possess their Souls in Truth and Godliness.  
And yet some men there are, as there have been formerly, who fancy to themselves a Church in this present world, without spot or wrinkle; and dream of such a Field as contains no Tares, of such an House as hath no Vessels but of honour, sanctified and prepared for the Master's use. The Cathari in the East, the Donatist in the South, and the Novatians in the West, who made one Faction only, though of several names, were anciently of this opinion, and set up Churches of their own of the New Edition. For flattering themselves with a conceit of their own dear sanctity, they thought themselves too pure and pious to join in any act of worship with more sober Christians; and presently confined the Church, which before was Catholic, to their own private Conventicles, and to them alone, or intra partem Donati 
k August. Passin. , as they pleased to phrase it. Who have succeeded them of late, both in their factions, and their follies too, we all know full well. The present ruptures in this State do declare most evidently, that here is Parson Donati now, as before in Africa. A frenzy which gave great offence to the Ancient Fathers, who laboured both by Speech, and Pen, to correct their insolences; and of such scandal to the Churches of the Reformation, that Calvin, though a ridged man, and one inclinable enough unto new opinions, did confute their dotages, and publicly expose them to contempt and scorn 
l Calvin. Instit. l. 4. c. 1. . The Ancients and the Moderns both have agreed on this, That though the Church of Christ be imperfect always, and may be sometimes faulty also, yet are not men to separate themselves so rashly from her Communion, or make a rupture for poor trifles in the Body Mystical. It argueth little Faith, and less Charity, saith renowned Cyprian, if when we see some Errors in the Church of God, De ecclesia ipsi recedamus 
m Cyprian. Epl. 3. l. 3. , we presently withdraw ourselves, and forsake her fellowship. And here we might bring in St. Augustine, and almost all the Fathers to confirm this point; but that they are of no authority with the captious Schismatic, and now of late disclaimed by our neater wits. Therefore for further satisfaction of the stubborn Donatist, we will behold the Constitution of the Church in the Book of God, and take a view of the chief Types and Fortunes of it, to see if we can find there such a spotless Church, as they vainly dream of. In Adam's family, which was the first both Type and Seminary of the Church of God, there was a Cain, a murderer 
n Gen. 4.8. , that slew his brother: Amongst the Sons of God in the time of Noah 
o & 6.2. , how many that betook themselves to the daughters of men; and in Noah's Ark, the next, and perhaps the greatest; a Cham, which wretchedly betrayed the nakedness of his aged father 
p Gen. 9.22. . In Abraham's house there was an Ishmael that mocked at Isaac 
q & 21.9. , though the heir, and the heir of promise; in Isaac's a profane Esau that made his belly his God 
r & 25 31. , and sold Heaven for a breakfast; in Iacob's there were Simeon and Levi, Brethren in evil 
s & 45.4, 5. , besides a Reuben who defiled his old Fathers Bed. And in the Church of Israel, when more large and populous, how many were mad upon the worship of the Golden Calf, more mad in offering up their sons to the Idol Moloch: Thousands which bowed the knee to Baal. Ten thousands which did sacrifice in the Groves, and prohibited places; yet all this while a Church, a true Visible Church, with which the Saints and Prophets joined in God's public worship.  
Let us next look upon the Gospel, and we shall find, that when the bounds thereof were so straight and narrow, that there were few more visible Members of it, than the Twelve Apostles; yet amongst them there was a judas that betrayed his Master. When it began to spread and enlarge itself to the number of One hundred and twenty, there were among them some half Christians, such as Nicodemus, who durst not openly profess the Gospel, but came unto the Lord by night 
t John 19.39. ; and some false Christians, such as Demas, who out of an affection to the present world, forsook both the Apostle, and the Gospel too 
u 2 Tim. 4.10. : She then increased to such a multitude, that they were fain to choose seven subordinate Ministers, the better to advance the work; and one of them will be that Nicholas, the founder of the Nicolaitan Heretics, whom the Lord abhorred 
x Apoc 2.15. . Follow it out of jewry into Samaria, and there we find a Simon Magus, as formal a Professor as the best amongst them 
y Acts 8.13, 25. ; and yet so full of the gall of bitterness within 
z Ignat Epl. ad Trallinf. , that Ignatius in plain terms calleth him, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The firstborn of the Devil 
a Sozom. hist. Eccles. l. 1. 21. . Trace it in all the progress of it thorough Greece and Asia, and we shall see the factiousness of the Corinthians, the foolishness of the Galatians, and six of the seven Asian Churches taxed with deadly sin. Good God, into what corner of the Earth, will the Donatist run, to find a Church without corruption, free from sin and error. It must be sure into the old Utopias, or the new Atlantis, or some Fool's Paradise of their own in terra incognita; unless (as Constantine once said unto Acesius, a Novatian Bishop ᵇ, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) they can erect a Ladder of their own devising, and so climb up into the Heavens. Whilst they are here upon the Earth, they have no such hopes, and do but fool themselves in the expectation.  
The chief occasion of these Errors, which the two opposite Factions in the Church of Christ have thus fallen into, is a mistake of the right constitution of the members of it. For those of Rome condemning all the Protestant party for Heretics, and the Eastern Churches for Schismatical; and then excluding Heretics and Schismatics from being any members of the Church at all; not only appropriate to themselves the name of Catholic▪ but consequently confine the Church within their Communion. And on the other side the Donatist, and their Modern followers, out of the dear affection which they bear themselves, first make the Church to consist of none but the Elect, and none to be Elect, but those who join fellowship with them; and so by the same necessary consequence, have confined the Church within the Walls or Curtains of their private Conventicles. Both faulty, and both grounding their unsound Conclusions, upon as false and faulty principles: For taking it for granted first (which will never be yielded by us, nor made good by them) that both the Christians of the East are Schismatics, and the Protestants of the North are no better than Heretics, yet are they not presently to be cut off from being any Members of the Church at all; as Bellarmine, and others of the Church of Rome, have been pleased to say. A Schismatic, in the true meaning of the word, is he, Who holding an entire profession of the truth of God, and joining with the Church in all points of doctrine, do break the peace thereof, and disturb the order, by refusing to submit themselves to their lawful Pastors, and yield obedience to her power in external matters. If he stay there, and withal fall not into manifest Heresy, and set on foot some new Opinion, as most Schismatics have used to do, the better to justify themselves in their separation, (so Nullum Schisma non sibi aliquam confingit haeresin, ut rectè ab Ecclesia recessisse videatur, as St. jerom notes it 
jerom. in c. 3. ad Tit. ) we have no reason to exclude him absolutely from the Church of Christ: For so long as he falleth not into dangerous error, but holds by the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles, which the Church is built on. He is, and may be still a member of the Church of God, though not of this or that particular Church or Congregation, from which he hath disjoined himself by his wilful folly, nor yet so absolutely and fully of the Church of God, as they who do communicate entirely in all things necessary. As long as the Schismatic retaineth the profession of the Christian Faith, in all the Fundamental Points and Articles of it, giveth e'er unto the Word, and receives the Sacraments, according to the institution of our Lord and Saviour, and performs other acts of Religious Worship, though in a separate Church or Congregation of his own assembling. I dare not shut him out from the hopes of Heaven, or rashly say, He is no subject of the Kingdom of Grace. He may be still a member of the Militant Church, and one day have his part in the Church Triumphant; notwithstanding his offence in separating from his Fellow-Christians (in case he do it not out of pride, and against the clear light of his own Conscience:) But the Church from which he makes his separation, may lawfully proceed against him, as a great offender, for breaking the bond of peace and unity, which ought so carefully to be preserved in a Church well constituted. With Heretics the case is worse, though not quite desperate; for they not only violate the Church's peace, but wilfully defend some pernicious Error, which tends to the destruction of the Faith itself: So Haeresis aliquod dogma perversum habe● 
d Id. Ibid. , saith the same St. jerom. But here we must distinguish first of Heresies, before we venture to resolve of the point in Question, it being so, That neither every erroneous opinion may be called an Heresy, nor every Heresy of itself is so great and capital, as to exclude the man that holds it from the Church of Christ. Many in all ages have been branded and condemned for Heretics, because they were not wholly of the same opinions with those of greatest reputation in their several Churches, though oftentimes in matters of inferior nature, in which diversity of opinions might have been admitted; whom it were both uncharitable and unchristian too, to bar from all their right and interess in the Christian Church. Nay granting, that the Heresy be in Fundamentals, not taken up upon mistake, but wilfully and maliciously invented for some private ends; yet in regard they still retain amongst them the profession of other Divine verities, which they hold and believe in common, with the rest of the faithful (for should they err in all points of the Christian Faith, they were no longer to be called Heretics, but Apostate Infidels) they pertain still unto the Church, and were so counted and esteemed of in the strictest times. An Argument whereof may be, that when an Heretic recanted of his sin and heresy, and sought to be again admitted to the Church's Ordinances; he was not entered, as at first, by the door of Baptism, nor any of his acts made void, if a Priest or Minister, which he had done by virtue of his holy orders. And so far were the Ancients from this new opinion of making Heretics no members of the Church at all: That the Rebaptisation of an Heretic, or of such as had been formerly baptised by Heretics, was counted an error in St. Cyprian, and afterwards condemned for Heresy in those that wilfully maintained it upon his Authority. The stories of those times make this plain enough, especially St. Augustine's works against the Donatists, where this point is very fully handled; and with his resolution in it, I conclude this controversy. Isti in quibusdam rebus nobiscum sunt, in quibusdam à nobis exierunt, &c 
e August. de Bapt. Cont. Donat. l. 1. c. 8.10. . In some things, saith the Father, they are with us still, in others they are departed from us. In those things wherein they agree with us, they are a part of that great building whereof the chief Cornerstone is Christ our Saviour: In those wherein they disagree, they are parted from it. And if they draw any more unto them, even they are fastened in those joints to the rest of that Body, etc. In qua nec illi separati sunt in which their Teachers are not separated from that Sacred Body.  
But yet although the Romanists are extremely out in excluding all whom they call Schismatics, or condemn for Heretics, from having any place in the Church of Christ, to make the more Elbow-room for themselves: The Donatist and his followers are more out than they, in making none but the Elect to be members of it, and so monopolising the whole Kingdom of Heaven to their faction only: In which it is most strange to see, with what precipitancy and inadvertency, many in the Reformed Churches of great name and credit, not looking into the design and ill consequents of it, have laboured to promote this Tenet as most true and Orthodox; especially after john Wicliff, and Hus his follower had set the same on foot again in these latter ages. That Wicliff was of this opinion, is evidently to be seen in Thomas Waldensis 
f Wald. Tom. 1. l 2. c 8, 9 , who doth not only so report him, but doth his best endeavour to confute him in it. And that Hus also taught the same, is no less evident by the proceedings had against him in the Council of Constance; in which, amongst others of his doctrines, they condemned this one, viz. Unicam esse sanctam universalem ecclesiam, eamque Praedestinatorum Vniversitatem 
g Concil. Constant. Sess. 15. , that is to say, That there is one only holy Universal Church, which is the general body of Gods Elect. Thus they; nor did there want some reason which might move them to it; For noting many Errors and Corruptions in the Church of Rome, which made them think it very unsafe to communicate any longer with it; and being withal unwilling to be so esteemed of as men out of the Church: They fell upon this new way to bear off that blow, by making the true Church of God to be always invisible, because consisting only of Elect and praedestinate persons, which were known only unto God. But on what grounds soever it was first excogitated, the fame and piety of the men have so endeared it to the Doctors of the Calvinian Churches, and others which profess most enmity to the Church of Rome, that generally they make no other definition of the Catholic Church, than that it is the Body Collective of Gods Elect. Ecclesia est coetus hominum ab aeterno, electus à Deo ad vitam eternam; as Vrsine in his Comment on the Palatine Catechism 
h Vr●in. in Catech. part. 2. qu. 54. . Ecclesia est coetus hominum sanctorum qui ex gratuita Dei electione vocati sunt in unionem cum Christo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad vitam eternam 
i Scharp. in Curs. Theog. , so saith Scharp, a Scotchman. Ecclesia Catholica coetus est hominum sanctorum quos ab aeterno Deus in Christo elegit 
k Whit. Contr. 2. qu. 1. Tom. 3. , so saith Dr. Whitakers. Ecclesia Catholica coetus est universus electorum, so the famous Raynolds 
l Raynold. in These 4. . The like might be produced from others of the Doctors of the Reformation, were not these few sufficient to speak out for all. Names great enough, I must confess, but not to be preferred before Sacred Truth; in the defence whereof, it behoves a man not wedded to men's names and dictates, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the words of Aristotle 
m Arist. Ethie. l. 1. , to sacrifice his private interesses and most dear Relations. That the Elect are of the Church, yea, and the chief ingredients of the whole compositum, it were impiety to deny: And that it is for their sakes chiefly that the Word of God is preached, the Sacraments of Christ administered, the promises of life eternal offered to the Sons of Men, is a thing which I shall easily grant. And so I understand the words of Clemens of Alexandria, saying, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
n Clem. Alex. Admon. ad Graec. . The Church of the firstborn, it is (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, saith the Text, whence the Father had it) whose names are written in the Heavens 
o Heb. 12.23. , as St. Paul informs us. But in a great house, there are more people than the children, though all they coheirs; and in a Royal Court there are many Retainers, whose names are not registered in the Check. Though the Elect are of the Church, yet neither all they, nor yet they alone. Not all the Elect; for when Saul breathed out slaughter against the Saints 
p Acts 9.1. ; and Mary Magdalen was possessed with seven devils 
q Luke 8.2.  at once (whether with so many wicked spirits, or the seven deadly sins, we dispute not now) who can affirm them to be Members of the Church of Christ? And yet who can or dare deny, that they were vessels of election, elect according to the foreknowledge of Almighty God? Secundum praescientiam & praedestinationem, quam multi oves foris, quam multi lupi intus, as St. Augustine hath it. According to God's prescience and predestination 
r August. in Joh. , How many of the Sheep (saith he) are without the Church; how many Wolves contained in it? And in another place, Electorum quidam in haeresibus aut Gentilium superstitionibus sunt, & tamen illic novit Dominus qui sunt ejus 
s Id. de Bapt. Contr. Don. l. 1. , Many of the Elect. saith he, are yet involved in Heresy or Heathenish Superstitions, whom yet God knoweth, to appertain unto the number of his people. Nor they alone. For there are Wolves within the fold, as the Father telleth us; and many which partake of the heavenly calling, who by impurity of life, and unfoundness of Doctrine, exclude themselves from having place in the Heavenly Kingdom. Out of the many which are called, but few are chosen; because they do not cheerfully obey that calling, and harken not with due obedience to the voice of God, which calls them in the Church unto newness of life. Were it not so, and that even wicked men, and ungodly sinners did appertain unto the Church, and that the Heretic and Schismatic were not members of it; The Church had no authority to proceed against them, or to endeavour their reclaim by Ecclesiastical censures. Though God both may and will judge them, when he sees his time, yet the Church cannot do it. For what have I to do to judge them also that are without 
t 1 Cor. 5.12, 13. , saith the great Apostle. And what were this, but to make the Church of God, which is pure and holy, to be a stable of unclean beasts, and a sink of filthiness: To which, all scandalous sinners would repair in swarms, in confidence of enjoying there their desired impunity. God's field hath Tares as well as Wheat, and both permitted to grow up till the general harvest 
u Matth. 13.30. , when he shall give his Angels charge to sever the wicked from the just and righteous persons; to bind the one in bundles for eternal fire, but gather the other for his barn, for the joys of Heaven.  
Now as these opposite parties have extremely erred in the right constitution of the Members of the Church of Christ; so have they failed as grossly in their Doctrine of the Church's Head: Which the one side have made too great for that Sacred Body; the other, all Body in a manner, but no Head at all. I speak not here of Christ, (understand not so) whom both sides do acknowledge for the Head of the Body Mystical, but of the Supreme Head on Earth, to whom the Government of the Church is by him committed. Our Masters in the Church of Rome, first make the Government of the Church to be Monarchical, and lay the burden on the shoulders of one man alone; and then this more than man, this Monarch, to be the Pope of Rome, and none else but he. For the first part of this Assertion, they pretend the Scriptures, mustering up all the Privileges which Christ gave to Peter; which were they such as are pretended, were but personal only, no more annexed to his Successors in the Chair of Rome, than in that of Antioch. But for the second part thereof, they confess ingenuously, that there is no Scripture to be found. For Bellarmine, who had canvased this point as thoroughly as any man what ever of all that party, is fain to shut it up with this close at last, That though some Headship or Supremacy may seem to be conferred on Peter in the Book of God, Tamen Pontificem Romanum Petro succedere express in Scriptures non haberi 
x Bellar. de Rom. Pont. l. 2. c. 12. , yet that the Pope succeeded Peter, is not found in Scripture, but grounded on Tradition only, as before was said. And if it be not found in Scripture, (as he saith it is not) we shall as little build our Faith upon their Traditions though now we see what makes them rank Traditions equal with the written Word) as upon those similitudes and ill-grounded consequences, which, for want of better proof, he is fain to fly to. And yet this point thus weakly grounded, is by them made an Article of the Catholic Faith; and that not only in the new Creed of Pope Pius the Fourth (who might be partial in his own cause) where it brings up the Rear; but in the general esteem of the Court of Rome, where it chargeth in the very Front. For when the Princes of those times applauded the piety and courage of King Henry the Eighth, in that without any alteration in Religion, he had suppressed the Pope's Authority in all his Dominions: The Papal faction thought the censure to be very unjust, Primo & praecipuo Romanensium fidei Articulo, de Pontificis Primatu immutato 
y Histor. Conc. Trid. l. 1. , considering that the first and chiefest Article of the Faith, that of the Pope's Supremacy, was so changed and abrogated. But on what ground soever they have raised this building, and placed the Headship of the Church on such rotten shoulders as are not able to support it; yet is this Head become so monstrous, that it is grown bigger than all the rest of the Body. For do not his own Canonists say, that the Pope hath power of both the Swords, that Christ committed to St. Peter (and in him to them) Terreni & coelestis imperii jura 
z Distinct. 22. mnes. , The rights both of the Earthly and Heavenly Kingdoms. Was it not openly affirmed in the Council of Lateran, In Papa esse omnem potestatem, &c 
a Council Later. sub. Leone. 10. ? That in the Pope there was vested an authority over all powers, both in Heaven and Earth. And in pursuance of this power, have they not frequently deposed Kings, absolved the Subjects of the Oaths of Allegiance, and disposed of Kingdoms? till at last his Parasites came to broach this Tenet, Papam esse verum Dominum temporalium, ita ut possit auferre ab alio quod alias suum est, etc. That is to say, That the Pope only is the true and direct Lord of all Temporal States; so that he may deprive whom he will of his estate, without any remedy: All Bishops and Princes whatsoever, not being the Proprietaries of their own estates; but Bailiffs and Stewards under him 
b joh. de paris. de Potest. Reg. & Papali. c. 5. . Thus also in Spiritual matters, do they not teach that the whole World is his Diocese, that he is Ordinarius omnium hominum 
c Extrav. de Appel. , and Episcopus totius orbis, the ordinary Judge of all mankind, and Bishop of the whole world? and that being thus possessed of this general Bishopric, Omnes Episcopi descendunt à Papa quasi membra à Capitè, & de plenitudine ejus omnes recipiunt 
d Durand. de Minist. & Ord. ; All Bishops derive their power from him, as the Body doth motion from the Head, and that of his fullness they have all received: That if the Pope should teach (as he may and doth) Virtutes esse vitia, & vitia esse virtu●es 
e Bellar. de Rom. Pont. l. 4. c. 5. ; That virtue is vice, and vice virtue, we were bound to believe him. And more than so, That what crime soever he commit, he is not to be censured or condemned for it, Nec à Concilio, nec à tota Ecclesia, nec à toto mundo 
f Pet. de Palad. de Pot. Pap. Art. 9 , neither by a Council, nor by all the Church together, nor the whole World neither. So privileged in a word he is, that as one of them saith, Si Papa innumerabiles populos catervatim secum ducat mancipio Gehennae 
g Distinct. 40. Si Papa. , etc. If the Pope draw infinite companies of people with himself to Hell; yet must no mortal man presume to reprove him for it. Why so? The Reason is most plain and evident, Quia Papa & Christus unum faciunt Consistorium 
h Hostieus. in Extrav. de Praelat. Translat. , because the Pope and Christ conjunct do but make one Consistory, and consequently it must be as great a Sacrilege to question the acts of the Pope, as those of Christ.  
We see by this, to what a monstrous greatness this Head is grown, how unproportionable to the Body his own Creatures make him. And yet he is not only greater than all the Body, but he is all the Body too; the Pope and Church being grown to be Terms and Convertible. For so saith Gregory de Valentia, Per ecclesiam caput ejus intelligimus, &c 
i Greg. Valent. Disp. Theol. Tom. 3. . By the Church we mean her head, and by that the Pope. Dominicus Bannes affirms the same, Pro eodem omnino reputatur autoritas ecclesiae universalis, & autoritas summi pontificis 
k Bannes in 22. 2●. pag. 72. , The authority of the Pope, and that of the Universal Church, is altogether the same. The whole authority of the Church abideth in him, saith Thomas Aquinas 
l Aquin. 2a. 2ae qu. 1 I●art. 2. . It remains all in him, saith Silvester 
m Silvest. in summa verbo fides. , another of their principal Schoolmen. Bellarmine is more plain than any, Papa potest dicere ecclesiae, i. e. sibi ipsi 
n Bellar. de. Conc. l. 2. c. 10. , The Pope (saith he) may tell the Church, that is, himself. His meaning is, That lest the Pope should want Remedy when offence is given him, he may be Judge in his own cause, and on complaint unto himself, see the matter mended. But this he learned of Innocent the Third Pope of that name, who challenged to himself the cognizance of some points in difference, between King Philip of France, and john King of England, because it is written in the Gospel Dic ecclesiae; as I have read in some good Author, but cannot call to mind in whom.  
Never did Text of Scripture meet with two such learned Glossaries; never was Pope and Cardinal better matched; nor need I add more in so clear a case, unless it be that commonly they call the Pope Virtualem Ecclesiam, or the Virtual Church, (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek;) because what power soever doth of right belong to the Body Collective of Christ's Church (the Church Essential, as they term it) is virtually contained in his person only. Me thinks it might have been enough for a single man to have been counted only for a Chapel of Ease. But such is the ambition of the Pope of Rome, that unless he may be taken for the Catholic Church, he passeth not for being reckoned for a Church at all.  
And yet this of the two is the lovelier Error. Better the Church be all head, than no head at all. And such a Church that is all body, and no head at all, have some of our Reformers modelled in their later Platforms. The Presbyterian Party first began this Monster, which those of the Independent way have now fully perfected. The Presbyterian Form being hatched in a popular state, but such as did acknowledge a supreme command in the great Council of that City, first make all Ministers equal amongst themselves, and then associate with each Minister, two, or more Lay-Elders, whom they invest jointly with all manner of Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, which anciently, and of right did belong to Bishops. But this Presbytery thus constituted is not so supreme, but that it is accountable to the Classis, within which it is, as that unto the Provincial Assembly, and all unto that National Meeting, which being made of the Deputed Ministers, and Lay-Elders out of each Presbytery, hath the name of General; not such a General Assembly as St. Paul speaks of (though possibly the name may allude to that.) For neither are they the Church of the firstborn, nor all of them at all times of the number of those whose names are written in the Heavens 
o Heb. 12. . But let them call it what they will, they have given us such a Model of Church-Government, as was not known amongst the Ancients, and made it in effect but an headless body: The Ruling Members being all equal in themselves, and yet so Heterogeneous in the whole Compositum, that the greatest part thereof are men of inferior quality, men of Shops and Trades, and consequently uncapable of Spiritual Powers. Which if it do not make the Church to be all Body, doth yet come very near it, to a Tantamount. But what the Presbyterians wanted to complete this Monster, hath since been added by the Brethren of the Independency; who living in the waste and deserts of New England, where every man was a king in his own opinion, and had so much of Caesar in him, as to brook no Superior; fitted the Government of those Congregations which they called the Churches, according unto that equality and want of order, which they had been accustomed to in Civil matters. For in their Platform every Congregation, whether little or great, is absolute in itself, and independent of any other; having in itself, a supreme Authority of exercising Ecclesiastical Powers, and Spiritual Faculties, without any reference or appeal in point of grievance: And in the exercising of those powers and faculties, every Member of the Congregation, whether poor or rich, as they are all concerned, are all equally interessed. And for the Ministration of the Word, and other Ordinances (for I think, they do not call them Sacraments) though many times they do set a part some particular persons; yet do they not exclude any man of what rank soever from exercising of his gift, as the Spirit moves him. In this quite contrary to the Fathers of the Presbytery; who though they do so dearly affect a parity amongst the Ministers themselves, yet do they suffer none to perform that Office, but such as have an outward calling by giving them the hands of fellowship 
p Gal. 2.9. : Which Ceremony they conceive savours more of parity, than that of the imposition of hands used in Ordinations. And though each Presbyter and Presbytery too, stand in equal rank and equipage with one another; yet in relation to their Meetings or Bodies aggregate, they do allow of sub and supra, the Presbytery being subordinate unto the Classis, as the Classis is to the Provincial, and that to the General Assembly, from which lieth no appeal in what case soever. But so it is not with the Brethren of the Independency, every particular Member of their Congregations being permitted to Preach and expound the Scripture, according to the measure of the gift which is given unto him. So that if Jerome were alive, he might most justly make complaint of that foul disorder, which some began to practise in those early days, but was never so much in request as amongst this people. Whereas (saith he) all other Arts and Mysteries, have their peculiar Artists and distinct Professors, Sola Scripturarum ars est quam omnes passim sibi vendicant 
q Hieron. Epl. ad Pa●l. Tom. 3. , only the Art of Preaching and Expounding Scripture is usurped by all men. For this (saith he) each weak old man, and ta●ling gossip (for we have Women Preachers too in these Congregations) and each wrangling Sophister, every man in a word doth entrench upon, and take upon them to teach others what they did never learn themselves. Some with a supercilious look speak big, and dogmatise of holy Matters amongst silly women; others learn that of women (it is a shame to say it) which afterwards they teach to men; and some again, with great variety of words and sufficient impudence, do talk to others of those things which they understand not themselves. A man would think St. Jerome were inspired with the Spirit of Prophecy, and that he spoke not of the frenzies of the former times, but the distempers of the present. And yet perhaps we have a better character of them (especially as it relates to their way of Government) in the old Acephali, the Heretics which had no head, as their name doth signify: Of whom Nicephorus thus informeth us, Acephali ob cam causam dicti sunt, quod sub Episcopis non fuerint, &c 
r Niceph. Eccle. hist. lib. 18.45. . The Acephali were so called (saith he) because they were not under Bishops; and therefore neither did they minister Baptism according to the solemn and received Order of the Church, nor celebrate the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, or any other Divine Office, in the usual manner. And because every man had liberty to add unto the holy Faith, what new points he pleased, a very great number of Heretics and Apostates did ensue upon it, with whom the Church for a long time was perplexed and exercised. Besides that, great seditions and disorders did from hence arise; the rascal rabble of that Sect pressing unto the Rails of the Altar, threatening to fine the Priests, and cast them out of their Churches with reproach and infamy, if they presumed to mention the Authority of the General Council (that of Chalcedon it is he means) or to recite the names of those holy Fathers who were present at it. So far, and to this purpose he, in which we may discern a great deal of the humour, as well as we have found the name of our new Acephali.  
But to proceed, The Government of the Church not being Monarchical, as our Masters in the Church of Rome would have it, nor Democratical or Popular, as the Fathers of the Presbytery, and Brethren of the Independency have given it out, both in their Practice and their Platforms; it remains then, that it must be Aristocratical. And this indeed hath been the judgement of most pure Antiquity, and verified in the practice of the happiest times. For howsoever those of Rome do persuade themselves, that Christ invested Peter with a Sovereign power over the rest of the Apostles; yet generally the Fathers of the Primitive times have determined otherwise: For so saith Origen, Haec velut ad Petrum dicta sunt omnium communia 
s Orig. in Mat. Tract. 1. , Those things which seem spoken to St. Peter only, are common unto all the rest. Thus Cyprian, Hoc erant utique & coeteri Apostoli quod fuit Petrus, pari consorti praediti & potestatis & honoris 
t Cypr. de simple. Praelat. , The rest of the Apostles were as much privileged as Peter, and were all invested with a like proportion, both of power and honour. Thus Jerome also for the Latins (the two great Writers of the African and Alexandrian Churches you have heard before.) Super Petrum fundatur Ecclesia &c 
u Hier. Advers. Jovinian l. 1. . The Church is founded upon Peter; but this is said in another place of the other Apostles, all of which had the Keys of Heaven, Et ex aequo super eos ecclesiae fortitudo solidatur, and the foundation of the Church is settled equally on them all. And thus St. Chrysostom for the Greeks, Paul (saith he) had no need of Peter, or stood in want of his voice (or countenance;) 
x Chrysost. in Epl. ad Gal. c. 1.  Honore enim illi par erat ne quid dicam amplius, but was his equal at the least, that I say no more. The like equality was maintained in the following times amongst the Bishops, or chief Rulers in the Church of Christ. For being Successors unto the Apostles in the Public Government, though not in their extraordinary power, as they were Apostles, (whereof we shall speak more anon) they had no reason to pretend superiority over one another, which none of the Apostles could lay claim unto. Of this equality of the Bishops doth St. jerom speak, (and it is indeed an evidence beyond all exception) Vbicunque fuerit Episcopus sive Eugubii, sieve Constantinopli, sive Alexandria, sive Tanai, ejusdem meriti, ejusdem est Sacerdoti● 
y Hier. in Epl. ad Evagr. . Potentia divitiarum & paupertatis humilitas vel sublimiorem vel inferiorem Episcopum non facit. Coeterum omnes Apostolorum Successores sunt. I have laid down the place at large, because St. Jerome is conceived to have been an enemy to the Episcopal Function, and to that end some fragments of him are alleged by our Innovators. His meaning is, That all Bishops, whether of the greater, or the lesser Cities, were of the same Order and pre-eminence in the Church of Christ; and that it was neither the pride of wealth, nor the baseness of a poor estate, which made a Bishop higher or lower in respect of Government; all of them being Successors unto the Apostles. And so Erasmus understands him, who in his Scholies on the place, gives this gloss or descant, Hieronymus videtur aequare omnes Episcopos inter se, &c 
z Eras. Scholar in Hier. Epi. . Jerome (saith he) doth seem to make all Bishop's equal amongst themselves, because all equally Successors unto the Apostles; and thinks not any B●shop to be less than another, because he is poorer; nor superior to another, because he is richer; making the Bishop of Eugubium (a poor small City) equal unto the Pope of Rome. St. Cyprian speaks as plain as Jerome, una est ecclesia, &c 
a Cypr. Epist. l. 4. Epl. 2. . There is one Church (saith he) divided by Christ throughout the world into many Members. Episcopatus item unus Episcoporum multorum concordi numerositate diffusus, And there is also one Bishopric (or Episcopal Office) alike diffused over all the world, by an agreeing, or corresponding multitude of many Bishops. And in another place to the same effect, Episcopatus unus, cujus à ●ingulis in solidum pars tenetur 
b Id. de simp. Praelat. , i.e. There is but one Episcopal Function in the Church of Christ, whereof every particular Bishop doth stand wholly seized. And this Pope Eleutherius doth himself acknowledge, who in a Decretal of his (let those of Rome look to the credit of the writing) tells the Bishops of France, (and in them all other Bishops of what Realm soever) Vobis à Christo Vniversalis Ecclesia est commissa 
c Eleuth. Epist. Concil. Tom. 1. , That to their care the Universal Church was by Christ committed. Every Bishop, wheresoever he be fixed and resident, hath (like St. Paul) an universal care over all the Churches. Which since they could not exercise by personal conferences, they did it in the Primitive times before they had the benefit of general Councils, by Letters, Messages, and Agents, for the communicating, of their Counsels, and imparting their advice unto one another, as the emergent occasions of the Church did require the same. Examples of the which, in the stories of those Elder-times, are obvious to the eye of each careful Reader. By means of which intercourse and correspondency, they maintained not only an Association of the several Churches for their greater strength, nor a Communication only of their Counsels for the public safety; but a Communion also with each other as Members of that Mystical Body, whereof Christ is Head. These Letters they called Literas format as & communicatorias, 
d August. Epl. 163.  as in an Epistle of St. Augustine, where both names occur. And for the public benefit which redounded by them, we may find it in Optatus an African Bishop, who having made a Catalogue of the Bishops of Rome from St. Peter down unto Siricius, who then held the place, or as his own words are, Qui noster est socius 
e Optat. Milev. de Schism. l. 2. , who was his partner or associate in the Common Government: He addeth, Cum quo nobis totus orbis commercio formatarum in una communionis societate concordat; i. e. With whom, together with ourselves, the whole world agreeth in one communion or society, by those Letters of intercourse. This, as it cuts off all pretensions to Monarchial Government, so doth it utterly destroy the Democratical or Popular Platforms: The Public Government of the Church belonging only unto Bishops, as Successors to the Apostles, to whom Christ committed it. For that the Bishops do succeed in place of the Apostles, is the constant and received opinion of all the Ancients. What Jerome did affirm herein, we have seen before; but he affirms it more than once, and gives it us again in another place, where showing the difference between the Montanists, and the Catholic Church, he saith, That they had made the Bishops the third in order, Apud nos Apostolorum locum Episcopi tenent 
f jerom. Epl. ad Marcellan. , but in the Church the Bishops held the place or rank of the Apostles. St. Augustine saith as much as he, deriving the descent or pedigree of the Christian Faith by the Seats of the Apostles, Et successiones Episcoporum 
g August. Epl. 42. , and the succession of Bishops, which were dispersed and propagated over all the world. St. Cyprian, as more ancient, so he speaks more plainly, who writing to Cornelius the then Bishop of Rome, exhorts him to preserve that unity, Per Apostolos nobis successoribus traditam 
h Cypr. Epl. 10. l. 2. vel Epl. 42. of Basil Edit. , which was commended by the Apostles unto them their Successors. And before him also Irenaeus, who lived very near St. john's time, if he lived not in it, who speaking of those Bishops which were ordained by the Apostles, and showing what perfections were required in them, than adds, Quos & successores relinquebant, &c 
i Iren. l. 3. c. 3. . Whom they left behind to be their Successors, delivering over unto them their own place of Government. Nothing can be more plain than this; and nothing can more plainly declare unto us, that neither the Monarchy of the Pope, nor the Democra●y of the Presbyterians, nor the Anarchy of the New-England Independents, had any being or existence in the Primitive times. The Government of the Church was wholly in the hands of Bishops, who separately in their several and respective Dioceses, or jointly in Provincial Councils, took order in all matters which concerned the same.  
But this is to be understood with a salvo jure, a reservation of the Rights and Privileges of such Christian Princes as God raised up to be nursing Fathers to his Church 
k Isai. 43.23. . To them, as God hath given the sword, (for he beareth not the sword in vain 
l Rom. 13.4. ) so are they made custodes utriusque tabulae, the Guardians and Keepers of both Tables of the Law of God; not only in keeping them themselves, as every private man is bound to do; but in that they ought to have a care, that all and every of their Subjects yield obedience to them, and punish such as evil doers which offend against them. And this extends as well to Bishops, and inferior Ministers, as to any Lay-subject of what rank soever; who though they derive their Spiritual Function immediately from Christ himself, yet are they not only subject to the Rule of Princes in matter of Exterior order in the service of God, but are to be accountable to them, in their Ministration, if wilfully they neglect or transgress their duties.  
The constant practice of all godly Kings and Emperors, as well under the Old Testament, as since the time of the Gospel, makes this plain enough: For if we please to search the Scriptures, we shall find David giving Rules to the Priests and Levites in matters which concerned the worship of God 
m 1 Chro. 23.4, 5, etc. , dividing them in several ranks, appointing unto every rank the course of his ministry, composing Psalms and Hymns to the praise of God, prescribing how they should be sung, with what kind of instrument 
n Ib. c. 25.12, 13. , and ordering with what vestments the Singing-men should be arrayed in the act of their service. We shall there find the Feast of Purim ordained by Mordecai 
o Esth. 9.19, 20. , who then possessed the place of a Prince among them; and that of the Dedication 
p 1 Mac. 1.16.  by the Princes of the Maccabean progeny; yet both religiously observed in all times succeeding; this last by Christ himself as the Gospel telleth us 
q John 10.22. . We shall there find how Moses broke in pieces the Golden Calf 
r Exod. 32.20. , and Hezekiah the Brazen Serpent; how the high places were destroyed, and the groves cut down by the command of jehosaphat 
s 2 Kings. 18.4. ; and what a Reformation was made in the Church of judah, by the good King josiah. Finally, we shall therein find how Aaron the High Priest was reproved by Moses, Abiathar deposed by Solomon 
t Exod. 32.21. ; the arrogancy of the Priests restrained by joas 
u Kings 2.26. . Such power as this, the godly Princes of the jews did exercise by the Lord's appointment, to the glory of Almighty God, and their own great honour: If they took more than this upon them, and meddled as Vzziah did, in offering incense, which did of right belong to the Priest's office 
x 2 Chro. 26.21 : A Leprosy shall stick upon him, till the hour of his death, nor shall he have a sepulchre amongst the rest of the Kings. And such, and none but such, is that supreme power, which we ascribe unto the King in the Church of England. The Papists, if they please, may put a scorn on Queen Elizabeth of most famous memory, in saying, Foeminam in Anglia esse caput ecclesiae, that a woman was the head of the Church of England, as once Bellarmine did; and Calvin, if he list, may pick a quarrel with the Clergy of the times of King Henry the eighth, as rash and inconsiderate men, and not so only, but as guilty of the sin of blasphemy 
y Calvin in Amos. c. 7. , (Erant enim blasphemi cum vocarunt eum summum caput ecclesiae sub Christo) for giving to that King, the title of Supreme Head of the Church under Christ himself. But Queen Elizabeth disclaimed all authority and power of ministering divine service in the Church of God, as she declared in her Injunctions 
z Qu. Injunct. An. 1559.  unto all Her Subjects. And the Clergy in their Convocation, Anno 1562. ascribe not to the Prince the Ministry of the Word and Sacraments 
a Artic. of Rel. 37. An. 1562. , nor any further power in matters which concern Religion, than that only Prerogative which was given by God himself to all godly Princes in the Holy Scriptures. More than this, as we do not give the Kings of England, so less than this the Christian Emperors did not exercise in the Primitive times, as might be made apparent by the Acts of Constantine, and other godly Emperors in the times succeeding, if it might stand with my design to pursue that Argument. Take one for all, this memorable passage in Socrates, an old Ecclesiastical Historian, who gives this Reason, why he did intermix so much of the acts of Emperors, with the affairs of holy Church: viz. That from that time in which they first received the Faith, Ecclesiae negotia ex illorum nutu perpendere visa sunt, &c 
b Socrat. Eccle. hist. l. 5. Proem. . The business of the Church did seem especially to depend on their will and pleasure, insomuch as General Councils were summoned by them, for the dispatch of such affairs as concerned Religion, even in the main and fundamentals, and other emergent occasions of the highest moment.    

CHAP. III. Of the Invisibility and Infallibility of the Church of Christ: And of the Church's power in Expounding Scripture, Determining Controversies of the Faith, and Ordaining Ceremonies.  
BUt laying by those Matters of External Regiment, we will look next on those which are more intrinsecal, both to the nature of the Church, and the present Article. For when we say, That we believe the Holy Catholic Church, we do not mean, That we do only believe that there is a Church upon the Earth, which for the latitude thereof, may be called Catholic; and for the piety of the Professors, may be counted Holy; but also that we do believe, that this Church is led by the Spirit of God into all necessary Truths; and being so taught, becomes our School-mistress unto Christ, by making us acquainted with his will and pleasure; and therefore that we are to yield obedience unto her Decisions, determining according to the Word of God.  
This is the sum of that which we believe in the present Article, more than the quoth sit of the same, which we have looked upon in the former Chapter; and to the disquisition of these points, we shall now proceed. A matter very necessary, as the world now goes; in which, so many Schisms and Factions do distract men's minds, that Truth is in danger to be lost by too much curiosity in enquiring after it. For as the most Reverend Father, the late Lord Bishop of Canterbury very well observes, Whiles one Faction cries up the Church above the Scripture, and the other side, the Scripture to the contempt and neglect of the Church, which the Scripture itself teacheth men both to honour and obey; They have so far endangered the belief of the one, and the authority of the other, That neither hath its due from a great part of men 
a Relat. of the Conf. in the Epistle Dedic. . The Church commends the Scripture to us as the Word of God, which she hath carefully preserved from the time of Moses, to this day; and so far we are willing to give credence to her, as to believe that therein she hath done the duty of a faithful witness, not giving testimony to any supposititious or corrupted Text, but to that only which doth carry the impressions in it of the Image and Divine Character of the Spirit of God. But if a difference do arise about the sense and meaning of this very Scripture, or any controversy do break forth on the misunderstanding of it, or the applying and perverting it to men's private purposes (which is the general source and fountain of all Sects and Heresies;) we will not therein hearken to the voice of the Church, but every man will be a Church to himself, and follow the Dictamen (or the illumination, as they please to call it) of their private Spirit. It therefore was good counsel of a learned man of our own, Not to indulge too much to our own affections, or trust too much unto the strength of a single judgement, in the controverted points of Faith; but rather to rely on the authority and judgement of the Church therein. For seeing (saith he) that the Controversies of Religion in our time are grown in number so many, and in nature so intricate, that few have time and leisure, and fewer strength of understanding to examine them; what remaineth for men desirous of satisfaction in things of such consequence, but diligently to search out which of all the Societies of men in the world, is that blessed company of holy ones, that household of faith, that Spouse of Christ, and Church of the living God, which is the pillar and ground of truth; that so we may embrace her communion, follow her directions, and rest in her judgement 
b Field of the Church in Epist. Dedic. . Very good counsel, I confess, and such as is to be pursued by all sober Christians: But being this counsel doth suppose, as a matter granted, that the true Church is very easy to be found if it be carefully sought after; which doth imply the constant and perpetual visibility of it, (however controverted and denied by some later Writers:) I shall first labour to make good that which he supposeth, and prove that which he takes for granted; that so we may proceed the better on our following search, and rest the surer on the judgement of the Church, being once found out.  
And here I shall not need to look back on those, who making none to be of the Church, but the elect children of God, do thereby make it altogether invisible to a mortal eye. We have spoke enough of that in the former Chapter, and therefore shall add nothing now, but that it may seem strange unto men of reason, that when Paul and Barnabas came to jerusalem, they were received of the Church, as is said Acts 15.4. and yet could not see the Church which did receive them; or that Paul went unto Caesarea, and saluted the Church, as is said of him, Acts 18.22. in case he had not seen the Church which he did salute. We grant, indeed, the Church to be invisible in its more noble parts, that is to say, the Saints triumphant in the Heavens, the Elect on Earth: and that it is invisible in the whole latitude and extent thereof; for who can see so great a body, diffused in all places of the world, at one time, or in all the times of his life, supposing him to be the greatest traveller that was ever known. And yet this doth not make the Church to be more invisible, than any particular man may be said to be invisible also, because we do not see his Brain, his Heart, and his Liver, the three principal parts, which convey Life, and Blood, and motion to the rest of the Body; nor because we cannot see at once both his back and his belly, and every other member in his full proportion. The visibility of the Church is proved sufficiently by the visibility of those several and respective Congregations or Assemblies of men, which are convened together under lawful Ministers for the Administration of the Word and Sacraments; to which, men may repair, as they see occasion, for their spiritual comfort, and instruction in the things of God; with whom they may join themselves in his public worship, with reference to that soul and power of Government, which animates and directs the whole. And such a Visibility of the Church there hath always been, from Adam down to Noah, from Noah to Abraham, from him to Moses and the Prophets, from thence to Christ, and from Christ's time unto the present. It is true, the light hereof hath been sometimes dangerously eclipsed, but never extinguished; no more than is the Sun when got under a Cloud. Desicere videtur Sol, non defi●it, as the Father hath it.  
Since God first had a Church, it hath still been visible, though more or less, according unto times and seasons, more in some places than in others, although not always in such whole and sound condition, as it ought to be. They who are otherwise persuaded, conceive that they have found some intervals or space of time, in which there was no Visible Church on the face of the Earth; of which times there are two remarkable under the Law, and two as notable as those since the birth of the Gospel. Under the Law they instance in the reign of Ahab, of which, Elijah makes complaint, That they had laid waste the Church, and slain the Prophets 
d 1 King. 19.14. , and that he only was left to serve the Lord; and in the persecution raised by Anti●chus. King of Syrius, of which it is reported in the Book of Maccabees, that the Sanctuary was defiled, the public Sacrifices interdicted 
e 1 Mac. 1. . Circumcision and the Sabbath abrogated; and more than so, the Idols of the Syrians publicly advanced for the people to fall down and worship, insomuch, as all those who sought after righteousness and justice, were fain to fly unto the wilderness, there to save themselves 
f 1. Mac. 2.19. . But the answer unto this is easy, For though those instances do prove that the Church at those times was in ill-condition, in regard to her external peace; yet prove they not, that there was such a general defection from the worship of God, as to make the Church to be invisible.  
For first, The complaint of Elijah was not universal, in reference to the whole Church of God, but in relation only unto that of Israel, where King Ahab reigned; a Schismatical Church that, when it was at the best, and sometimes an Idolatrous one also. The Church of judah stood entire in the service of God, according to the prescript of his holy Law, under the Rule and Government of the good King jehosaphat; a Prince, who with a perfect heart served the God of his Fathers, and who preserved the people under his command in the true Religion. The Sun shined comfortably on judah, though an Egyptian darkness had overspread the whole Realm of Israel. And if Elijah fled for safety to the woods and deserts, and did not fly for succour to the Land of judah, it was not out of an opinion, that the two Tribes had Apostated from their God as well as the ten, but out of a wise and seasonable fear of being delivered by those of judah, into the hands of his enemies; jehosaphat being at that time in good terms with Ahab, by whom Elijah stood accused for troubling of the State of Israel.  
As for the other instance under King Antiochus, the Text indeed describes it for a great persecution, greater than which that Nation never suffered under; but it declares withal expressly, that there was no such general defection from the Law of God, as was projected by the Tyrant. For the common people stood courageously to their old Religion, and neither would obey the King's Commandment in offering to the Syrian Idols, or eating meats which were prohibited by the Law of Moses. And as for those which fled unto the Woods and Wilderness, they fled not thither only for their personal safety, in hope to find an hiding place in those impenetrable deserts; but as unto a place of strength, or a fortified City, from whence they might sally (as they did) against their enemies; and in the which, they might enjoy that freedom in the exercise of their own Religion, which could not be hoped for in jerusalem, and other places under the command of Antiochus. A persecuted Church we find both before, and here; but the persecution neither held so long, nor was so general, as to make the Church to be invisible.  
And so it is also in those two instances, which the Patrons of this invisibility have pitched upon, since the times of the Gospel; the one being in the prevalency of the Arian Heresy, the other in the predominancy of Popish Superstition.  
For the first, it is alleged out of St. jerom, Ingemuit mundus, & see Arianum esse miratus est 
g Hier. advers. Lucif. , That the world groaned under the burden of that Heresy, and wondered how she was become so wholly Arian. But this admits of such a qualification and restriction, as utterly overthroweth the thoughts of invisibility. For that which jerom calls Mundus, or the whole world generally, in Lerinensis is but orbis penè totus, almost all the world. Arianorum venenum non jam portiunculam 
h Vincent. Lerinens. advers. haeres. c. 7.  quandam, sed orbem pene totum contaminaverat, The Arian poison (saith that Author) had not only envenomed a small part or portion, but almost all the world itself. And that which Lerinensis calls orbem pene totum, almost all the world, was only almost all that part of the world, which was under the command and power of the Roman Emperors. Costerius in his Notes on Lerinensis doth expound him so, saying, Adeo incredibiles fuisse impietatis hujus successus, ut omnes fere Romani imperii Ecclesias haec lues pervaserit. And to this Exposition, that of Gregorius Presbyter, who wrote the life of Gregory Nazianzen, gives a great deal of light, who attributes the spreading of that powerful Heresy, unto the countenance it had from some of those Emperors, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
i Greg. Presbyt. in vita Greg. Nazianz.  who laboured with might and main to promote the same; so that the growth and spreading of the Arrian Heresy, was neither over all the world, nor almost all the world, but only over almost all the Churches in the Roman Empire; and that but for the time only, when Constantius and Valens did possess the Throne. There were then many Christian Churches in Persia, India, Aethiopia, where neither Valens nor Constantius were of any power, and many Catholic Bishops in France, Egypt, Italy, and consequently Catholic Churches also, to which an Orthodox Professor might have had recourse for the worship of God, according to the prescript of his holy Word. And though the Arian Heresy, both for time and place, was more diffused and longer-lived than any other whatsoever in the Church of Christ; yet neither did it overspread the whole face of the Church, or made it for the time invisible to discerning eyes; nor by denying the consubstantiality of persons in the holy Trinity, did they so abjure the Christian Faith, as not to be accounted Christians (though defiled with Heresy) by their greatest enemies. The Orthodox Professors so esteemed them, reckoning their Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, to be lawfully called, their Sacraments to be lawfully ministered by them, their Forms of Divine worship nothing different from the rest of the Church, except in the Doxology only. And if they did proceed against them in the way of punishment, it was not as they were no Christians, 
k Theod. Eccl. hist. l. 1. c. 24.  but as Arian Heretics. And on the other side, holding entire all other points of Christian Faith, and scrupling only against that, because they found it not in terminis in the holy Scriptures; the Gentiles, amongst whom they lived in the outparts of the Empire, persecuted them, as they did the rest who professed the Gospel, with fire and sword, and put them unto grievous deaths; insomuch, as suffering for the Christian Faith, not the Arian Heresy, some of them had the honour to be counted Martyrs even by the Catholics themselves, Ita ut non-nulli ex Ariana secta Martyres fierent, as it is in Socrates 
l Socrat. Eccle. hist. l. 4.27. .  
But the main difficulty doth relate to that space of time, in which the power and superstition of the Church of Rome, carried all before it; and in relation unto that, the Fautors of the Church's invisibility, have most beat their brains: For not being able, when put to it by their Romish Adversaries, to find a Church agreeing in all points with the Protestant Tenets, before Luther's time, they betook themselves to this, as their surest refuge, That the Church was many times invisible, and so had been immediately in the time before them. Thus Luther pleased to place the Church, in quibusdam reliquiis 
m Luther. de servo Arbitrio. , in a certain remnant of men whom the world took no heed of, who were indeed the people, and the Church of God, though not so accounted: And Calvin hides the same in uncertain corners, where God did wonderfully preserve it from the sight of men, Et mirabiliter Ecclesiam suam tanquam in latebris servasse 
n Calv. Instit. l. 4. c. 1. sect. 2. , as his own words are. But this not giving satisfaction to the common Adversary, who press upon us with this Question, Where was your Church before Luther; a pedigree thereof was fetched from Wicliff, Hus, the Albigenses, the Pauperes de Lugduno, and I know not whom 
o The Visibility of the Church by Archbishop Abbot, Dr. Prid. alii. ; who in their several times and ages, had publicly opposed some errors and corruptions in the Church of Rome, and thereby drew upon themselves the hatred of the Roman Clergy. And by this means it was conceived, That a perpetual visibility of the Protestant Churches might be fairly proved; the fancy of an invisible Church beginning to grow out of credit with most sorts of men; especially considering, that besides the opposition made by those before remembered, Clemangius, Armachanus, Lincolniensis, had severally inveighed against the pride and vices of the Court of Rome; and that there were many things also in the Church itself, whereof St. Bernard, and Pope Adrian wished a Reformation. But this, in my opinion, will not do the deed: For neither did Clemangius, Armachanus, or the rest that follow, withdraw themselves from the Communion of the Church of Rome; or if they had, they did not thereby make themselves a distinct Church from it, and least of all, a Church agreeing in all points, (perhaps not in any) with those which are defended in the Protestant Schools. And as for Wicliff, Hus, and the Albigenses, though they held some opinions which the Protestants do, yet held they many others which the Protestants do not 
p Harpsfield in Histor. Wicle●iana. . Some I am sure, which are as much abominated by the Church of England, as the extremest dregs of the Church of Rome. Nor can we prove the visibility of our Church from them, from whom we neither receive our Baptism, nor our Priesthood, nor our Form of Worship, nor any outward Rite and Ceremony, nor any thing, for aught I know, by which we claim the name of a Christian Church. Or if we did, our visibility would fail us in those frequent intervals, which were between Wicliff and the Hussites, the Hussites and the Albigenses, the Albigenses and the rest of those scattered companies, from whom this goodly Pedigree is to be derived: Whereof the one started up in England, the other long before him in Bohemia, the third in France, and others in the Mountains of Italy, not having a Succession from, nor giving a Succession unto one another. So that relinquishing this plea as a sorry shift, which only seemed to be excogitated for the present pinch; If any ask me, Where the Church was before Luther's time, I answer generally, First, That if the Church had failed in these Northwest parts of the world (as indeed it did not) yet were there many Christian Churches in the East and South, the Greeks, Nestorians, Melchites, Abassins', with divers others, with whom the first Reformers might have held communion, though differing from them in some points of inferior moment. And secondly, I answer more particularly, that our Church was before Luther, where it hath been since, in Germany, France, England, Italy, yea, and Rome itself; A sick Church then, but since by God's grace brought to more perfect health; a corrupt Church then, but since reform of those particular abuses, both in life and doctrine, which seemed most offensive. That the Church of Rome is a true Church, (though not the true Church) no sober Protestant will deny. junius grants it in his Book De Ecclesia, cap. 19 and so doth Dr. Whitakers also, Cont. 2. Qu. 3. cap. 2. as great an enemy as any, of the Romish factions. The like doth Dr. Raynolds in his fifth Thesis, though he deny it (as he might) to be either the Catholic Church itself, as they vainly boast, or any found member of the same. Nay, even the very Separatists do not grudge them that, as Francis johnson in his Treatise called A Christian Plea, Printed 1627. pag. 123, etc. A true Church in the verity of essence, as the Church is a company of men which profess the Faith of Christ, and are baptised into his Name; but neither Orthodox in all points of doctrine, nor sound or justifiable in all points of practice. And a true Church in reference to the Fundamentals of the Christian Faith, which they maintain as constantly, and defend as strongly against the several Heretics and Sectaries of this present age, as any Doctor of the Protestant, or Reformed Churches; though in the Superstructures they are fallen aside from the received opinions of the Catholic Church. A true Church too, in which Salvation may be had, (for why should we deny the possibility of their salvation, who have been the chief instruments of ours 
q Hook. of Just. sect. 17. ? saith judicious Hooker) by those especially, who ignorantly follow their blind guides, and do not pertinaciously embrace any Popish error, either against their Science, or against their Conscience. Of whom, as of the greatest numbers in the Church of Christ, we may very safely say with Augustine, Coeteram turbam non intelligendi vivacitas, sed credendi simplicitas tutissimam facit 
r August. Cont. Fund. c. 4. , i. e. That amongst ordinary men, it is not the vivacity of understanding, but the simplicity of believing, which makes them safe. Of this Church were the Protestants Members, before they did withdraw themselves from the errors of it; before by this their separating from the errors of it, they were schismatically expelled and thrust out of the communion of the Church of Rome, by those which had the conduct of the affairs thereof, in the beginning of that breach. And from this Church, do we of the Church of England, derive immediately our interess in Christ, by the door of Baptism; the Body of the holy Scriptures, the Hierarchy or Public Government, our Liturgy and Solemn Forms of Administration; not as originally theirs, but as derived to them from the Primitive times, and by them transmitted unto us. This Bristo doth acknowledge in his Book of Motives 
s Bristo Mot. 34. ; and this we think it no reproach unto our Religion to acknowledge also: That Aphorism of King james of most famous memory, deserving to be writ in Letters of Gold; viz. That no Church (under colour of Reformation, for of that he speaketh) ought further to separate itself from the Church of Rome, either in Doctrine or Ceremony, than she had departed from herself, when she was in her flourishing, and best estate, and from jesus Christ our Lord and Head 
t Confer. at Hampton Court, p. 77. . And yet I know not how it hath come to pass, but so it is, that instead of reforming of an old Church, which is all we did; the building of a new Church, will we, nill we, is by some Zelots of bo●h sides obtruded on us. Whereas the case, if rightly stated, is but like that of a sick and wounded man, that had long lain weltering in his own blood, or languishing under a tedious burden of diseases; and afterwards, by God's great mercy, and the skilful diligence of honest Surgeons and Physicians, is at the last restored to his former health. No new man in this case created, that is God's sole privilege, but the old man cured: No new Church founded in the other, that belongs to Christ, but the old Reformed. When Hezekiah purged the Temple, and other godly Kings and Princes of the Land of judah did reform Religion, as we know they did; Neither did the one erect a new Temple, or the others frame a new Religion, but only rectified in both what they found amiss. And so it was also in the Reformation of the Church of Rome, further than which, we need not go to look where our Church was before Luther's time, or to find out that constant and perpetual visibility of the Church of Christ, which hath been hitherto the subject of this Disquisition.  
But put the case the worst that may be, and let it be supposed this once, That the Church of Rome had so apostated from the Faith of Christ, that it ceased to be a Church at all, both in name and nature; yet were there many Christian Churches in the East and South, all of them visible no doubt, as they still continue, which constantly maintained all those several Truths, that had been banished and exploded in the Church of Rome. For that the Universal Church should so fall away, as to teach any doctrine contrary to the Faith and Gospel, is plainly to the promise made by Christ our Saviour. It is true indeed, Christ hath not bound himself, nor annexed his spirit so inseparably to a National or Provincial Church, but that it may fall at last unto such desperate and dangerous Errors, as finally may cut it off as an unsound Member from the residue of the Body Mystical. The Candlestick may be removed as well out of any Church, as from that of Ephesus 
u Apoc. 2.5. , if wilfully they put out the light which shined amongst them; and so it is determined by the Church of England. As the Church of Jerusalem, Alexandria, and Antioch, hath erred, so also the Church of Rome hath erred not only in their living, and manner of Ceremonies, but also in matters of Faith, saith the Nineteenth Article 
x Artic. 19 An. 1562. . But so it is not with the Universal, the Body Collective of God's people, the Church essential; nor can it be colourably inferred, (though it be the best Argument of Dr. Raynolds 
y Raynold. in Thes. 2. , to evince his Thesis) that because many of those who are outwardly called, and some of the Elect themselves, many of the Flock, and some of the Pastors, and that not only in their single and sole capacities, but as convened in Council about sacred matters, have held opinions contrary to the truth of God; That therefore the whole Church, or the Body collective and diffusive over all the world, shall universally agree to betray the truth, or be given over unto Error.  
One might as logically conclude, that because many of the Citizens, and some of the Aldermen, many of the Parishioners, and some of the Ministers, and that not only in their Houses, but the very Church, or the Guildhall, were swept away at London, by the last great plague; that therefore the whole City was dispeopled by it, not a man escaping.  
Such Arguments as these, need no other Answer, than to demonstrate the non sequiturs, and inconsequence of them.  
But first, before we do proceed unto further evidence, it will be necessary to lay down the state of the Question, which is the Litis contestatio, or the point in Controversy. And in my mind Becanus states it very rightly; We will therefore use his terms, though he were a jesuit, and propose it thus, viz. An tota Ecclesia Christi, vel tota multitudo Christianorum, quatenus ex Pastoribus & ovibus conflata est, errare possit in aliquo Articulo vel puncto fidei 
z Becan. Man. Cont. l. 1. c. 3. ; that is to say, whether the whole Church of Christ, or the whole multitude of Christian people, consisting both of the Flock and the Pastors too, may err in any Article, and point of Faith, or publicly profess any point of Doctrine, contrary to the Faith and Gospel of our Lord and Saviour.  
This we deny, and we deny it on the credit of our Saviour's promises, Upon this Rock (saith he) will I build my Church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it 
a Matth. 16.18. . Where, by the gates of Hell, as the Fathers say, he means not only outward violence, but Errors, Heresies, and false Doctrines, which covertly or openly do aim at the ruin of it. And of this mind is Epiphanius in Anchorato, Origen, Tract. 1. on Matthew, Jerome and Bede upon the place. St. Augustine also hence inferreth, Haereses omnes de ecclesia exiisse tanquam sarmenta inutilia à vite praecisa, ipsam autem manere in radice sua, in vite sua 
b August. de Symbolo. l. 1. c. 6. , that is to say, That Heresies were to the Church like unprofitable branches cut off from the Vines, the Church remaining still in the Root, in the Vine itself. How so! Quia portae inferorum non vincant eam, because the gates of Hell cannot overcome it. He promised his Apostles to send them a Comforter, who should teach them all things, john 14.16. who should guide them into all truth, john 16.13. Not that he bound himself hereby to teach them all things, or lead them into all truths, of what sort soever; For it is sure, that some things the Apostles were still ignorant of, as of the day and hour of the General judgement; And probable enough it is, that there were many Philosophical and Historical truths, into which, the Spirit did not lead them. All things, and all truth, must be understood of all things truly necessary to a man's salvation. In omnem veritatem, i. e. Omnem quae expedit ad salutem 
c Raynold. in 6. Thesibus. , saith Dr. Raynolds very rightly. A promise made indeed to them, the Apostles personally; for it was unto them he spoke, and to none but them; but made to all the Church in them, the whole Church essentially, whereof they were at that time the sole Representatives. Consolatprium est ex hoc loco cognoscere, & fide audire, quicquid est promissum his Apostolis, promissum esse toti ecclesia 
d Claud. Guilliand. in Joh. , saith a learned and a modest Papist, It is (saith he) a special comfort to learn, and faithfully believe, from these words of Christ's, that the promise made to these Apostles, was also made to the whole Church, to the Body collective. It was not Peter only, as the Papists say, nor the Apostles only, as the words may seem to bear, to whom these promises were made, touching the not prevailing of the gates of Hell, and the conducting of their feet in the ways of truth; but to the whole Body of the Church represented by them.  
Hence I conclude, That the whole Church, in the full latitude and universality thereof, is free from Error; such Errors as do lead to the gates of Hell, and are destructive of salvifical, supernatural Truths: The Church being so far privileged by our Lord and Saviour, that when the truth is banished out of one or more particular Churches, it is admitted into others, and some still opposing those corruptions both in Doctrine and Practice, which in the others are defended. The Church in this capacity is secure from Error, even in the points of smallest moment; and so it is confessed by Luther, a man not over forwards to ascribe too much unto the Church 
e Luth. de Arbitr. servo. . Impossibile est illam errare posse etiam in minimo Articulo, It is impossible, saith he, that the Church should err (conceive him of the Church essential) in the smallest Article.  
But this perhaps will be made more apparent by the matter of Fact, than by any other kind of evidence in an Argumentative way. And for this matter of Fact, we will take those times in which the truth may seem to be most miserably oppressed, by the predominancy of the Arian faction, and the tyranny and superstitions of the Popes of Rome. That the Arian Heresy did extend no further than the Roman Empire, we have shown before; that all the Roman Empire was not poisoned with it, we will show you now. For besides all the Bishops of Rome successively, from the first rising of this Heresy, to the fall thereof, who constantly (except Liberius only) did maintain the truth; the stories of those times acquaint us with the names and merits of some Catholic Bishops, who with their Churches, did oppose that predominant faction. And because it were an endless, and indeed a needless labour to recite them all, take but those three whom Jerome brings together in one line or passage. O Siquidem Arianus victis, triumphatorem suum Egyptus excapit; Hilarium ● praelio revertentem Galliarum Ecclesia complexa est; ad reditum Eusebii sui lugubres vestes Italia mutavit 
f Hierom. adv. Luciferian. , i. e. Upon the overthrow of the Arians, Egypt received her Athanasius, now returned in triumph; the Church of France embraced her Hilary (he was Bishop of Poitiers) coming home with victory from the battle; and on the return of Eusebius (Bishop of Vercellis) Italy changed her mourning garments. By which it is most clear, even to the vulgar eyes, that not these Bishops only did defend the truth, but that it was preserved by their people also; who never had received them with such joy and triumphs, had they not been all of one opinion. Or had but those three Bishops only stood unto the truth, yet had that been sufficient to preserve the Church from falling universally from the Faith of Christ, or deviating from the truth in that particular: The word of truth being established, (as say both Law 
g Deut. 17.6 Matth. 18.16.  and Gospel) if there be only two or three witnesses to attest unto it. Two or three Members of the Church may keep possession of a truth in the name of the rest, and thereby save the whole from Error; even as a King invaded by a foreign enemy, doth keep possession of his Realm by some principal fortress, the standing out whereof in time, may regain it all. The Body cannot properly be said to be wholly dead, as long as any Member of it doth remain alive.  
But in this storm raised by the Arians in the Church, the Orthodox Professors had but one Error to encounter with, and that discovered and opposed in the first rising of it. The Church of Rome maintained so many, and those promoted by such power, and so subtle instruments, that there was far more danger in the Mass of Popery, than any single Errors in the times before; yet never could they so prevail by their force or cunning, but that their Errors were opposed in some Church or other; and truth, though banished in the West, found hearty entertainment in the Eastern parts.  
As for example, The Pope's Supremacy, is, and hath long been held at Rome as an Article of the Faith, and a chief one too, and held so ever since it was declared by Pope Boniface the Seventh, Omnino esse de necessitate salutis omni humanae creaturae su●esse Romano Pontifici 
h De major. & obedient. , i. e. That it was altogether necessary to Salvation, for every mortal man to be subject to the Bishops of Rome. But this Supremacy was never acknowledged by the Greeks, nor Muscovites, nor by the Habbassines (or Christians of Ethiopia) nor by the Indian Churches neither, till these latter days, in which they have submitted to the Pope's authority 
i Brerewoods' Inquiries. . And in the West itself where the Pope most swayed, it was continually opposed by the Albigenses, the Hussites, Wiclivists, and others, in their several times. The Pope's usurped a power over Kings and Princes, and did not only hold it as a matter practical, but publicly maintained and taught as a doctrinal point. But against this did all the Princes of the world oppose their power; the French by the Pragmatical Sanction 
k Ext. in Goldast. Monarch. ; the English by the Statutes of Provisions and Praemuniri 
l 25 ● 27 Edw. 3.7 & 13 Rich. 2. etc. ; the Germane Emperors at once, both by Sword and Pen, as is apparent by the writing of Marsilius Patavinus, Dantes, Occam, and many others of those times; whereof consult Goldastus in his Monarchia. It pleased the Popes, for politic and worldly ends, to restrain the Clergy of that Church from marriage, because that having Wives and Children, they would be more obnoxious to their natural Princes, and not depend so much as now, on the See of Rome 
m Hist. Concil. Trid. l. . But on the other side, the Greeks, the Melchites, and the Maronites, (which are names of several Churches of the East) neither deny Ordination unto married men, or force them to abstain from the use of their Wives when they are in Orders 
n Brerewoods' Inquiries. . The Russes and Arminians admit none but married men into the Priesthood; the jacobites and Nestorians allow of second and third marriages in those of their Clergy; as also do the Indians and Christians under Pr●ster john, the Patriarch being first sued to, for a dispensation. In Germany, when this yoke was first laid upon them by Pope Gregory the Seventh, the Clergy generally opposed, styling that Pope, Hominem plane haereticum & vesani dogmatis 
o Schaf●aburgens. hist. Rer. Germ. , an Arant Heretic, and the Broacher of a mad opinion. In Italy it was taught by Panormitanus, Votum non esse de essentia Sacramenti 
p Panormitan. de Cler. Conjugar. , That the vow of single life was not essential unto Orders. How late it was before the Priests of England could be brought to forsake their Wives, and what embroilments have been raised in the Church about it, Henry of Huntingdon, and others of our Ancient Writers do declare at large? Pope Innocent the Third first settled Transubstantiation in the Church of Rome; a word not known unto the Fathers in the Primitive times, nor any of the old Grammarians, and Professors of the Latin tongue. But the Armenians do reject it as an unsound Tenet 
q Brerewoods' Inquiries. ; and so, as I conjecture, did the Egyptian, Maronite, and the Habbassine Churches, who neither do allow of the Reservation, nor the Elevation of the Host (as the Romanists call it) which are the Pages or attendants of that Popish Error. And in the Church of Rome itself, it was opposed by Bertram, Berengarius, and Basilius Monachus; as afterwards by the Pauperes de Lugduno, the Albigenses, Hussites, Wiclivists, and their descendants, to the time when first Luther writ. The taking of the Cup in the holy Sacrament from the Lay-Communicant, and thereby sacrilegiously robbing him of the one half of his birthright, crept unawares upon the Church, by a joint negligence, as it were, both of Priest and People: But so, that it was still retained by the Eastern Churches; claimed, and accordingly enjoyed by the Albigenses, and their followers; and so tenaciously adhered unto by the Bohemians (where the Hussites had their first original) that in small time they got the names of Calistini 
r Hist. Concil. Trid. l. 1. , and Sub utrâques, from their participating of the Cup, and communicating under both kinds, when none else durst do it. And this they did in so great numbers, that Cochlaeus, one of their greatest Adversaries, relates that Thirty thousand of them did assemble together at one time, to receive the Sacrament, under both kinds. The fire of Purgatory hath for a long time warmed the Pope's Kitchen, and kept the Pot boiling for the Monks and Friars: But there is no such fire acknowledged by the Greeks and Moscovites, nor by the Melchites, jacobites, Armenian, and Egyptian Christians 
s Brerewoods' Inquiries▪ , nor by the Waldenses, Hussites, and their Descendants. The Worshipping of Images hath not only been practised, but enjoined by the Church of Rome, ever since the second Nicene Council: But the Christians of St. Thomas (so they call the Indians) admit no Images at all to be set up in their Churches 
t Id. ibid. ; The Grecians, Moscovites, and Ethiopians, though they admit of Painted Images, yet allow not of the Carved, and forbid the worshipping of both. The Church of Rome hath long time used Auricular Confession as a kind of State-picklock, and opening therewith the Cabinet-Counsels of the greatest Kings, and laid it as a burden upon the conscience of the penitent sinner; But the Nestorians, and the jacobites, never did enjoin it themselves, or approved it in them that did; And though the Greek Church still retains the use of Confession (of the right use whereof we shall speak hereafter) yet such a rigorous pressing of it, as our Masters in the Church of Rome have been used unto, they allow not of.  
These are some few of many Errors, which have been taught and patronised in the Church of Rome; which yet were constantly opposed and condemned by others, in the East and South: As on the other side, those Churches of the East and South, and such as in the West did gainsay the same, had their several Errors, which never could find entertainment in the Church of Rome. Insomuch, as one might safely say of Theological truths, as was once said of Philosophical, viz. Though they may not possibly be found all at once together in a National or Particular Church; yet they are all preserved in the Universal. And it is the Universal Church, or the Church Essential, not any Topical Church whatever, which is free from Error.  
This being granted (as I think it is proved sufficiently) that the Church Essential cannot fall into any Error, which is destructive of divine and salvifical truth; We will next see, whether, and if at all, how far this privilege may be extended to the Representative. For being it is impossible for the whole Church, the diffusive Body, to meet together in one place, for the composing of such Differences, and suppressing such Heresies, as may occasionally arise in some part thereof, it hath been found expedient in all former ages, to delegate some choice men out of the particulars, which being met, should represent the whole Body Collective, and in the name of those that sent them, agree amongst themselves what was fit to be done. These Meetings were called General Councils: Concilia, à conciliando, from reconciling and atoning such material differences, as did disturb the public peace; and general, in relation unto National and Provincial Councils, assembled on occasions of more private nature. From the Apostles times did this use continue. Who on the dissension raised by some which came down from judea, and mingled Circumcision and the Law of Moses 
u Acts 18.1, 5. , with the Gospel of Christ, did meet together to consider and determine of it. And having resolved upon the point, they sent their Decretory Epistle unto all the Churches, requiring their obedience and conformity to that resolution, which on debate amongst themselves, and by the guidance and assistance of the Holy Ghost 
x Ibid. v. 28. , had been made therein.  
This, as it was the first General Council of the Church of Christ, so was it the model also of all those that followed; and of this Council it is certain, that it could not err; Partly, because composed for the most part of the Lords Apostles, but principally, because guided and directed by the Spirit of Truth, who had the supreme managing of the Action. But this we cannot say of those General Councils which after were assembled on the like occasions▪ For though the Church essential might delegate her power unto those Commissioners whom she employed at such Assemblies; yet could she not also import her Privilege. And for the Members who convened, they neither were endued with a like measure of the Spirit, as the Apostles were possessed of; nor sure infallibly of such assistance from the Holy Ghost, as he vouchsafed to them in that great affair; and therefore could not warrantably presume of the like freedom from error, which that first General Council might lay claim unto. Augustine hath resolved it so against Cresconius, Non debet se Ecclesia Christo praeponere, cum ille semper veraciter judicet, Ecclesiastici autem judices plerumque falluntur 
y August. Cont. Crescon. l. 2.27. , The Church (saith he) ought not to prefer herself before Christ, (i. e. Before Christ speaking in his Gospel) considering that he always judgeth according to truth, but Ecclesiastical judges being men, are ofttimes deceived. And so it is resolved by the Church of England, who hath declared, That for as much as General Councils be Assemblies of men, whereof all be not governed by the Spirit, and Word of God, they may err, and sometimes have erred in things appertaining unto God 
z Artic. of Rel. 21. An. 1562. . A possibility then there is in the judgement of the Church of England, That General Councils may err in the things of God; (whether in points of Faith, or not, there is nothing said:) For being the Conveners are no more than men, men subject, as all others are, to Humane affections, and biased many times by their private interesses, it cannot be, but such a possibility may be well supposed. And a declaration there is also, that some General Councils have actually erred, as did the second Nicene in the matter of Images; for which it stands censured by the Bishops of France and Germany, in the Synod held at Frankford, under Charles the Great 
a An. 794. .  
Which notwithstanding, such and so sacred is the name of a General Council, if truly such, that is to say, if it be lawfully called, and rightly constituted, That the determinations of it are not rashly to be set at nought, or wilfully opposed, or scornfully slighted, it being the Supreme Tribunal of Christ on Earth: For since the Lord was pleased so graciously to promise, That when two or three were gathered together in his name, he would be in the midst of them 
b Matth. 18.20. , It may be piously inferred in Pope Celestines words, Cum nec tam brevi numero Spiritus defit, quanto magis eum interesse credamus turbae convenientem in unum sanctorum 
c Epl. Celest. P. R. ad Synod. Ephes. ; If the Spirit (saith he) be not wanting to so small a number, how much rather ought we to believe, that he vouchsafes to be present with a great multitude of good and godly men convened together. He that heareth you, heareth me, and he that despiseth you, despiseth me 
d Luke 1●▪ 16. , said Christ himself also unto his Apostles, and in them unto their Successors in his holy Ministry.  
May it not piously be inferred from those words of Christ, as did some of the Ancients in an African Synod, to be a very gross absurdity for a man to think, That God would give an understanding, and discerning Spirit to particular men, Et sacerdotibus in Concilium congregatis denegare 
e Epi. Synod. Afr. ad Celest. , and not afford it to be a company of godly Bishops met together in counsel? And reason good. For as many eyes see more than one, and the united judgements of learned men assembled together, carry more authority in Natural or Political things than of some single persons only; so questionless the joint prayers of many devout and godly men prevail more with God, for the assistance of his Spirit in their consultations, than any private man can challenge or presume upon, when points of Faith, and matters appertaining to the service of God, are to be debated.  
Upon these grounds, from the Apostles times to these, the Church hath exercised a power in her Representatives, of settling such affairs as concerned the public; whether it were, that some new controversy did arise in the points of Faith, or an emergent Heresy was to be suppressed; or that some Text of holy-Scripture, which Heretics had wrested to their private ends, was to be expounded; or finally, that the worshipping of God the Lord, in the beauty of holiness, did require it of them. Nor was it only exercised by the Church de facto, but de jure too. And so it is resolved by the Church of England, in her Twentieth Article; the first and last expressly, the second upon strong and necessary consequence. The Church hath power to decree Rites or Ceremonies, and authority in Controversies of Faith: And yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain any thing that is contrary to the Word of God; neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another 
f Artic. of Rel. 20. An. 1562. . Wherefore, although the Church be a witness, and a keeper of holy Writ; yet as it ought not to decree any thing against the same, so besides the same ought it not to enforce any thing to be believed as necessary to salvation. So stands the Article in the very Acts and Records of the Convocation, An. 1562. where by the way, the Book of Articles being reprinted in Latin, An. 1571. when the Puritan Faction did begin to show itself in its colours, the first clause touching the authority of the Church, in Controversies of Faith, and in Decreeing Rites and Ceremonies, was clean omitted, and stands so maimed in the Book called The Harmony of Confessions for the Protestant and Reformed Churches: According to which false and corrupted Copies (I know not by what indirect means, or by whose procurement) it was so Printed too at Oxon, An. 1636. when the Grandees of that Faction did begin to put forth again. But to proceed.  
The Church or Body Collective of the people of God, having devolved this Power on her Representatives, doth thereby bind herself to stand to such Conclusions as by them are made; till on the sight of any inconvenience which doth thence arise, or upon notice of some irregularity in the form and manner of proceeding, she do again assemble in a new Convention, review the Acts agreed on in the former Meeting, and rectify what was amiss, by the Word of God. And this is that which St. Augustine averreth against the Donatists, men apt enough to fly in the Church's face, if any thing were concluded or agreed upon against their Tenets. Concilia quae per singulas provincias fiunt, plenariorum Conciliorum autoritati cedere, ipsaque plenaria saepe priora à posterioribus emendari, cum aliquo experimento aperitur quod clausum erat, & cognoscitur quod latebat 
g August. de Baptism. Cont. Donat. l. 2. c. 3. , Provincial Councils, saith the Father, aught to submit unto the General: And of the Generals themselves, the former are oftentimes corrected by some that follow, when any thing is opened which before was shut, or any truth made known, which before was hidden. For otherwise it was not lawful, nor allowable to particular men, to hold off from conformity to the public Order which had been settled in the Church, nor to make public opposition unto her conclusions; which, as the late most Reverend Father in God, the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury very well resolves it, Are with all submission to be observed by every Christian 
h Confer. with Fisher, p. 55, 56. and in the large Answer, p. 229.  (that is, as he expounds himself in another place) to have external obedience yielded to it at least, where Scripture or evident demonstration do not come against it. And this hath been the judgement of the purest times, and the practice of the best men for the times they lived in: For thus said Constantine the Emperor to the point in hand, Quicquid in sanctis Episcoporum Conciliis decernitur, &c 
i Euseb. de vit. Constant. l. 3. c. 18. , Whatsoever is decreed in the holy Councils of Bishops, ought wholly to be attributed to the Will of God. More plainly Martianus Caesar, Injuriam eos facere Reverendissimae Synodi judicio qui semel judicata in dubium vocent 
k In Acts Synodi Chalcedonens.  That they commit a great affront against the dignity and judgement of the most Reverend Council, who shall presume to call in question what is there determined. Which words of his are well enough allowed by Doctor Whitakers 
l Whitak. Cont. 1. qu. 5. cap 6. , if understood of those things only (as they ought to be) which are determined according to the Word of God. St. Augustine to this purpose also, Insolentissimae est insaniae, &c 
m August. Epl. 118. c. 5. . It is, saith he, an insolent madness for any man to dispute, whether that be to be done, or not, which is determined to be done, and therefore usually is done, by the whole Catholic Church of Christ St. Bernard also thus for the darker times, Quae major superbia, &c 
n Bern. Ser. 3. de Resurrect. . What greater pride than that one man should prefer his own private judgement before the judgement of the Church? Tanquam ipse solus Spiritum Dei habeat, as if he only were possessed of the Spirit of God. And this holds also good in National and Provincial Councils, which being the full Representative of the Church of that State or Nation, hath power sufficient to compose such controversies as do arise amongst themselves, and to require obedience of the Represented, according to the limitations laid down before in the case of Ecumenical or General Councils.  
The practice of all times and Nations make this plain enough; in which, many several Heresies have been concluded against, as in that of Milevis, wherein the Pelagians were condemned, Anno 416. Matters of Faith have been resolved on, as in the third of Toledo, Anno 589. wherein many Anathemaes were thundered out against the Arians; and finally, Constitutions made for regulating the whole Body of Christian people in the worship of God, as in the General Code of the African Councils. Or were there no Record thereof in the times foregoing, yet may we find this power asserted in these later days, and that by some of the most eminent Doctors of the Reformed Churches. For the Divines of the Classis of Delft, assembled amongst others in the Synod of Dort, do declare expressly, Ordinem nullum, nullam pacem in Ecclesia Dei esse posse, &c 
o Act. Syn. Dord●c●b●. p. 94, 95. . That there would be no peace, nor order in the Church of God, if every man were suffered to Preach what he listed, without being bound to render an account of his doctrine, and submitting himself unto the judgement and determination of Synodical meetings. Why so? For if Paul and Barnabas, say they, being endued with the same Spirit, as the rest of the Apostles were endued withal, were content to go unto jerusalem to know the judgement of the rest in the point then questioned: Quanto aequius est ut Pastores alii qui Apostoli non sunt, hujusmodi Synodicis Conventibus se subjiciant; How much more fitting must it be for other Ministers, which are no Apostles, to captivate their own judgements unto that of a public Synod. Nor was the Synod itself less careful to provide for her own authority, than the Delphenses were to promote the same; And thereupon decreed in the close of all, Abdicandos esse omnes ab officiis suis, &c 
p Ib. pag 324. . That every man should be deprived as well of Ecclesiastical as Scholastical Offices, who did not punctually submit to the Acts of the Synod; and that no man should be admitted to the Ministry for the time to come, who refused to subscribe unto the doctrine which was there declared, and Preach according to the same. And in pursuance of this final determination, no fewer than Two hundred of the opposite party, who did refuse to yield conformity to the Acts thereof, were forthwith banished the Country 
q Synodal. Remonst. in Praefat. : A Proclamation following in the Rear from the Civil Magistrate, That no man should presume to afford them any help or maintenance, during that miserable exile. Whether this were not too severe, I regard not here.  
This is enough to show, that National or Provincial Councils do still claim a power in handling, and determining controversies touching points of Faith; and that they challenge an obedience to their Resolutions, of all which live within the bounds of their jurisdiction, without which all Synodical meetings were but vain and fruitless.  
Nor hath the Church only an especial power in determining of controversies raised within her, according to the Word of God; but so to explicate and interpret the Word of God, that no controversy may arise about it for the time to come. Four Offices there are which the Church performs in reference to the holy Scriptures.  
The first, Tabellionis, of a Messenger or Letter-Carrier, to convey it to us; Quid enim est Scriptura tota nisi Epistola omnipotentis Dei ad Creaturam suam 
r Greg. in Epl. l. 4. ep. 48. , saith St. Gregory, What else is the whole Scripture, but a Letter or Epistle from Almighty God unto his Creature? and by whose hands doth he convey this Letter to us, but by the Ministry of his Church?  
The next is Vindicis, of a Champion to defend it in all times of danger from the attempts and machinations of malicious Heretics, and such corruptions of the Text, as possibly enough might have crept into it, in long tract of time. The jews since our Redeemers time, had falsified some places of the Old Testament, and expunged others, which spoke expressly of Christ's coming: Delentes namque literas inficiati sunt Scripturam 
s Chrysost. in Philip. c. 3. Homil. 11. , as we find in Chrysostom. The like saith Athanasius of their falsifications, Tam manifestis Scriptures & de Christo Prophetiis excaecavit Satanas Judaeorum oculos, etc. Ut talia testimonia falsa Scriptione falsarent 
t Athanas. advers. judaeos. . The Arians stand convicted of the like attempt, who had expunged ou● of all their Bible's these words of St. john, Deus est Spiritus, john 14.24. because they seemed to prove the Deity of the Holy Ghost; and that not out of their own Bible's only, but out of the Public Bibles also of the Church of Milan 
u Ambr. de Sp. Sanct. l. 3. c. 11. , Et fortasse hoc etiam in oriente fecistis; and probable enough it was, that they had done the same in the Eastern Churches saith St. Ambrose of them. But such a vigilant and careful eye did the Church keep over them, that their corruptions were discovered, and the Text restored again to its first integrity. The like may also be affirmed of such corruptions as casually had crept into the Text of holy Scripture, by the negligence of the Transcribers, and mistakes of Printers: Which the Church no sooner did observe (as observe them she did) but they were rectified by comparing them with such other Copies as still continued uncorrupted. Of which St. Augustine telleth us thus, Corrumpi non possunt, &c 
x August. Cont. Faust. Man. l. 32. c. 16. . The Scriptures (saith he) cannot be corrupted, because they are in the hands of so many persons: And if any one hath dared to attempt the same, Vetustiorum codicum collatione confutabatur, he was confuted by comparing them with the elder Copies.  
The third Office is Praeconis, of a Publisher or Proclaimer of the Will of God revealed in Scripture, by calling on the people diligently to peruse the same, and carefully to believe and practise what is therein written. And this is that whereof St. Augustine speaks in another place, saying, Non crederem Evangelio nisi me Ecclesiae Catholicae moveret autoritas 
y Id. Cont. Fund. l. 1. c. 5. , i. e. That he being then a Novice in the Schools of Christ, had not given credit to the Gospel, unless the authority of the Catholic Church had moved him to it.  
The fourth and last Office is Interpretis, of an Interpreter or Expounder of the Word of God, which in many places are so hard to be understood, that Ignorant and unstable men, may, and do often wrest them to their own destruction 
z 2 Pet. 3.16. , who therefore are to have recourse to the Priests of God, whose lips preserve knowledge, and from whose mouth the people are to take the explication of the Law of God. But being it happeneth many times that the Priests and Ministers themselves do not agree upon the sense of holy Scripture, and that no small disturbance hath been raised in the Church of Christ, by reason of such different Interpretations as are made thereof, every one making it to speak in favour of his own opinion; the Body of the Church assembled in her Representatives, hath the full power of making such Interpretation of the places controverted, as may conclude all parties in her Exposition: Both Protestants and Papists do agree in this; not all, but some of each side, and no mean ones neither. Sacrae Scripturae sensus nativus & indubitatus, ab Ecclesia Catholica est petendus 
a Petr. à Soto, Assert Cath. de Eccle. ; so said Petrus à Soto, for the Papist. The proper and undoubted sense of the holy Scripture, is to be sought (saith he) from the Catholic Church; which is indeed the general opinion of the Roman Schools. And to the same effect, saith Luther for the Protestant Doctors, De nullo private homine nos certos esse habeant necne revelationem Patris, Ecclesiam unam esse de qua non liceat dubitare 
b Luth. ap. Bellarm. de verb. Dei. l. 1.5. ; We cannot be assured, said he, of private persons, whether or not they have a revelation from the Father of Truth; it is the Church alone, whereof we need make no question. Which words, considering the temper of the man, and how much he ascribed to his own spirit in expounding Scripture, may serve instead of many testimonies from the Protestant Writers, who look with reverence on him as the first Reformer. This also was the judgement of the Ancient Fathers, St. Augustine thus, We do uphold the truth of Scripture, when we do that which the Universal Church commandeth, recommended by the authority of holy Scripture: And for as much as the Scriptures cannot deceive us, a man that would not willingly err in a point of such obscurity (as that then in question) ought to inquire the Church's judgement 
c August. Cont. Cre●●on. l. 1. c. 33. . With him agrees St. Ambrose also, who much commends the Emperor Gratian, for referring the interpretation of a doubtful Text, unto the judgement of his Bishops convened in Council. Ecce quid statuit Imperator? Noluit injuriam facere sacerdotibus, ipsos interpretes constituit Episcopos 
d Ambr. ; Behold, saith he, what the good Christian Emperor did ordain therein? Because he would not derogate from the power of the Bishops, he made them the Interpreters. Thus Innocent, one of the Popes, doth affirm in Gratian, Facilius inveniri quod à pluribus senioribus quaeritur 
e Distinct. quin●a cap de quibus. , i. e. The meaning of the Scripture is soon found when it is sought of many Presbyters or Elders convened together. And reason good. For seeing, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, because it came originally from such holy Men who spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost 
f 2 Pet. 1.20, 21. ; It is not subject to the humour of a private spirit, but to be weighed and pondered by that public Spirit which God hath given unto his Church, which he hath promised to conduct in the ways of truth, and to be with her always to the end of the world. Not that we do exclude any private man from handling of the holy Scripture, if he come sanctified and prepared for so great a work, if he be lawfully ordained or called unto it, and use such helps as are expedient and necessary to inform his judgement; nor that we give the Church such a supreme power, as to change the sense and meaning of the holy Scriptures, according as herself may vary from one opinion to another in the course of times.  
This is indeed the monstrous Paradox of Cusanus, who telleth us, That the Scripture is fitted to the time, and variously to be understood, so that at one time it is expounded according to the present fancy of the Church, and when that fancy is changed, that then the sense of Scripture may be also changed 
g Card. Cusa●. Epl. 2. & 7. ; and that when the Church doth change her judgement, God doth change his also. And this I call a monstrous Paradox, as indeed it is; in that it doth not only assubject the truth of Scripture, but even the God of truth himself, to the Church's pleasure.  
How much more piously hath the Church of England determined in it? who though it do assert its own power in Expounding Scripture, yet doth it with this wise and Religious Caution, That the Church may not so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another 
h Articl. 20. An. 1562. . Within which bounds, if she contain herself, and restrain her power, no doubt but she may use it to the honour of God, the settling of a Public Peace in all matters controverted, and the content and satisfaction of all sober Christians.  
The last part of the Church's power consists in the decreeing of Rites and Ceremonies, for the more orderly officiating of God's Public service, and the procuring of a greater measure of reverence to his holy Sacraments. Of this she hath declared more fully in another place.  
First, In relation to itself, to the Church's power, viz. Every particular or National Church hath authority to ordain, change, and abolish Ceremonies or Rites of the Church, ordained only by man's authority; so that all things be done to edifying 
i Articl. 34. An. 1562. . Next, in relation to the people, and their conformity, That whosoever through his private judgement, willingly and purposely doth openly break the Traditions and Ceremonies of the Church, which be not repugnant to the Word of God, and be ordained and approved by common authority, aught to be openly reproved, that others may fear to do the like, as he that offendeth against the common order of the Church, and woundeth the Consciences of the weaker Brethren.  
Which Propositions are so evidently and demonstratively true, according to the constant practice of approved Antiquity, that he must wilfully oppose the whole Catholic Church, and all the famous National Churches in the Primitive times, who doth not cheerfully and readily assent unto them. For who can show me any Council in the former Ages, wherein some Orders were not made for regulating both the Priest and People in the worship of God; wherein the Church did not require obedience to her Constitutions, and on defect thereof proceeded not to some public censure of the party? He must be utterly ignorant of all Antiquity, and the affairs of holy Church, that makes doubt of this. Nay, of so high esteem were the Church's Ordinances in matters of exterior order in the service of God, that they were deemed as binding as the word itself. And so St. Augustine hath resolved it, I● iis rebus de quibus nihil statuit Scriptura, mos populi Dei & instituta majorum, pro lege Dei tenenda sunt 
k August. Epl. 118. add Casulan. , as he in his Epistle to Casulanus: The customs of the Church, and the institutes of our forefathers, in things of which the Scriptures have determined nothing, are to be reckoned and esteemed of, as the Word of God. Our Saviour by his own observing of the feast of Dedication 
l John 10.22. , being of Ecclesiastical institution, and no more than so, showed plainly what esteem he had of the Church's Ordinances; and how they were to be esteemed of by the sons of men. And when St. Paul left this rule behind him, That all things be done decently, and in order 
m 1 Cor. 14.40. , think we he did not give the Church authority to proceed accordingly, and out of this one general Canon to make many particulars? Certain I am, that Calvin hath resolved it so, and he no extraordinary friend to the Church's power. Non potest haberi quod Paulus hic exigit, nisi additis constitutionibus tanquam vinculis quibusdam ordo ipse & decorum servetur 
n Calvin. in 1 Cor. c. 14.40. ; That which St. Paul requires, saith he, is not to be done without prescribing Rules and Canons, by which, as by some certain Bonds, both order and decorum may be kept together. Paraeus yet more plainly, and unto the purpose, Facit Ecclesiae potestatem de ordine & decoro Ecclesiastico liberè disponendi & leges ferendi 
o Paraus in locum. ; By this, saith he, doth the Apostle give authority to the Church of Corinth (and in that to other Churches also) of making Laws for the establishing of decency and order in the Church of Christ And Musculus, though he follow the citing of this Text by Eckius, in justification of those unwarrantable Rites and Ceremonies, Quibus Religionis nostrae puritas polluta esset, with which the purity of Religion had been so defiled; 
p Muscul. in locum.  yet he allows it as a rule for the Church to go by, Vt quae l●gitimè & necessario gerenda sunt in Ecclesia, That all those things which lawfully and necessarily may be done in the Church, should be performed with decency and convenient order. So that we see the Church hath power to decree Rites and Ceremonies in things that appertain to order, decency, and uniformity in Gods public service; and which is more, a power of making Laws and Canons to enforce conformity to the same; and that too (which is most of all) in the opinion of those men, which were no great admirers of the Church's customs, and looked not so much on the Primitive, as the present times.  
Nor is this only the opinion of particular men, but the declared judgement of the eldest Churches of the Reformation. The Augustane Confession published in the name of all the Protestants, and only countenanced and allowed of by Imperial Edict, not only doth ordain those ancient usages to be still retained in their Churches, which conduce to decency and order in the service of God, and may be kept in force without manifest sin 
q Confess. Augustan. Art. 15. : But it resolves, Peccare eos qui eum scandalo illos violant, etc. That they are guilty of sin who infringe the same, and thereby rashly violate the peace of the Church. And amongst those by them retained, are all the holy days and fasts observed in the Church of England, kneeling at the Communion, the Cross in Baptism, a distinct kind of habit for the Ministration, and divers others; which by retaining, they declare to be free from sin, but those men to be guilty both of sin and scandal, who wilfully refuse to conform unto them. The Bohemians in their Confession go as high as this, Humanos ritus & consuetudines quae nihil pietati adversantur, in publicis conventibus servanda esse 
r Conf. Bohem. Art. 15. ; i. e. That all Rites and Customs of Humane (or Ecclesiastical) Institution, which are not contrary unto Faith and Piety, are still to be observed in the public meetings of the Church. And still (say they) we do retain many ancient Ceremonies, as prescribed Fasts, Morning, and Evening Prayer on all days of the week, the Festivals of the Virgin Mary, and the holy Apostles. The Churches of the Zuinglian and Calvinian way, as they have stripped the Church of her ancient Patrimony, so have they utterly deprived her of her ancient Customs; not thinking their Religion plain enough, till they left it naked; nor themselves far enough from the pride of Rome, till they had run away from all Primitive decency. And yet the Swissers or Helvetian Churches, which adhere to Zuinglius, observe the Festivals of the Nativity, Circumcision, Passion, Resurrection, and Ascension, of our Lord and Saviour; as also of the coming of the Holy Ghost 
s Confess. Helvet. Artic. 24. . And those of the Genevian platform, though they have utterly exploded all the ancient Ceremonies, under the colour of removing Popish Superstitions, yet they like well enough of others of their own devising; and therefore do reserve a power, as appears by Calvin 
t Calvin. in 1 Cor. 14.40. , of settling orders in their Churches, to which the people shall be bound (for he calls them by the name of vincula quaedam) to conform accordingly.  
By which we see, that there hath been a fault on both sides in the point of Ceremonies; the Church of Rome enjoining some, (and indeed too many) Quae pietati adversantur, which were repugnant to the rules of Faith and Piety, and therefore not to be retained without manifest sin, as the Augustane and Bohemian Confessions do expressly say; and the Genevians either having none at all, or such as altogether differ from the ancient Forms.  
Against these two extremes, I shall set two Rules, whereof the one is given in terminis by the Church of England, the other by an eminent and renowned Member of it. The Church declares herself in the point of Ceremonies, but adds withal, That it is not lawful for the Church to ordain any thing that is contrary to the Word of God 
u Artic. of Relig. An. 1562. Art. 20. . That makes directly against those of the Church of Rome, who have obtruded many Ceremonies on the Church of Christ, plainly repugnant to the Word, and therefore not to be observed without deadly sin. The other Rule is given by our Learned Andrews, and that relates to those of the opposite faction. Every Church (saith he) hath power to begin a custom, and that custom power to bind her own children to it; Provided (that is the Rule) that her private customs do not affront the general, received by others 
x B. Andr. of the Resurrection, Serm. 13. , the general Rites and Ceremonies of the Catholic Church, which binding all, may not be set light by any. And this he doth infer from a Rule in the Mathematics, that Totum est majus sua parte, that the whole is more considerable than any part; and from another Rule in the Morals also, that it is, Turpis pars omnis toti non congrua, an ugly and deformed part which agrees not with the whole. So than according to the judgement of this Learned Prelate, the customs of particular Churches have a power of binding, so they run not cross against the general.  
First, Binding in regard of the outward man, who if he wilfully refuse to conform unto them, must, though unwillingly, submit to such pains and penalties, as by the same power are ordained for those who contemn her Ordinances. And they are binding too, in regard of Conscience, not that it is simply and absolutely sinful not to yield obedience, or that the Makers of those Laws and Ordinances can command the Conscience (Non ex sola legislatoris voluntate, sed ex ipsa legum utilitate 
y Stapl. Cont. 5. de potest. ecclesiae. Qu. 7 Art. 2. , as it is well resolved by Stapleton) but because the things which they command are of such a nature, that not to yield obedience to them, may be contrary unto Justice, Charity, and the desire we ought to have of procuring the common good of all men, amongst whom we live 
z Field. of the Church, l. 4. c. 33. , of which our Conscience would accuse us in the sight of God, who hath commanded us to obey the Magistrates, or Governors, whom he hath set over us, in things not plainly contrary to his written Word.  
To bring this business to an end, in points of Faith and Moral Duties, in Doctrines publicly proposed as necessary in the way of Salvation, we say as did St. jerom in another case, Non credimus quia non legimus 
a Hieron. adv. Helvidium. , We dare not give admittance to it, or make it any part of our Creed, because we see no warrant for it in the Book of God. In matters of exterior Order in the Worship of God, we say as did the Fathers in the Nicene Council 
b Concil. Nicen. Can. 6. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Let ancient customs be of force, and prevail amongst us, though we have no ground for it in the Scripture but this general warrant, That all things be done decently, and in order, as St. Paul advised. They that offend on either hand, and either bring into the Church new Doctrines, or cast out of the Church her ancient and approved Ceremonies, do violate that Communion of Saints which they ought to cherish; and neither correspond with those in the Church Triumphant, nor such as are alive in the Churches Militant.  
Of which Communion of the Saints I am next to speak, according to the course and method of the present Creed.    

ARTICLE X. Of the Tenth Article OF THE CREED, Ascribed to St. SIMON ZELOTES. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (i. e.) Sanctorum Communionem, Remissionem peccatorum. (i. e.) The Communion of Saints, The forgiveness of Sins.  

CHAP. IU. Of the Communion which the Saints have with one another, and with Christ their Head. Communion of Affections inferreth not a community of Goods and Fortunes. Prayers to the Saints, and Adoration of their Images, an ill result of this Communion.  
NExt to the clause, touching the nature and authority of the Catholic Church, followeth in order a recital of the principal benefits which are conferred upon the Members of that Mystical Body; Two in this life, and two in that which is to come. Those in this life, are first, that most delightful Fellowship and Communion which the Saints have with one another, and with Christ their Head; and secondly, That forgiveness and remission of all their sins, as well actual as original, which Christ hath purchased for them by his death and passion, and by the Ministry of the Church is confirmed unto them. Those in the world to come, are the fruits of these, that is to say, A Resurrection of the Body, held by the chains of sin in the shades of death; and a more full Communion with the Saints departed, than in this life can be enjoyed; that Fellowship which we have with them, being here but inchoate and imperfect, there complete and absolute. Of these, the first is the Communion which the Saints have with one another, and with Christ their Head; whereof, before I shall discourse, as it lieth before me, I shall first take the words asunder, and show what is the true meaning of the word communio; then who they be that are presented to us by the name of Saints. First, for the word communio, it signifieth that sacred action in which the faithful do communicate of the Body and Blood of Christ in the holy Eucharist. Thus Hugo Cardinalis hath it, Post hoc dicatur communio, quae appellatur, ut omnes communicemus 
a Hugo Card. in Speculo Ecclesiae. , i. e. After this let the communion be said, so called, because all should communicate, or, let it be so said, That all my communicate. Micrologus before him to the same effect, Non potest propriè dici communio 
b Microl. de Eccl. observat. , etc. It cannot properly be called a Communion, unless many do receive together. Cassiodorus before either in his Tripartite History, Stant rei, & velut in lamentationibus constituti, & cum sacra celebratio fuerit adimpleta communionem non recipiant 
c Histor. Trip. l. 9 c. 35. , i. e. They which lay under the Church's censures, stood a far off full of great heaviness and lamentation, and when the service was concluded, received not the Communion; but when they had fulfilled the course of their penance, Cum populo communionem participant, they were then suffered to communicate with the rest of the people. More ancient than them all, is, that Dionysius (whether the Areopagite, or not, I dispute not here) who wrote the Books De Hierarchia Caelesti & Ecclesiastica, in whom we do not only find the name, but the reason of it. Dignissimum hoc Sacramentum, &c 
d Dionys. de Hierarch. Eccles. . Most worthy (saith he) is this Sacrament, and far to be preferred before any other; and for that cause it is deservedly, and alone, (Meritò & singulariter, saith the Latin Copies) called the Communion. For although every Sacrament aims at this especially, to unite those that are divided, to the Lord their God: Attamen huic Sacramento Communionis vocabulum praecipuè & peculiariter contingit; yet to this Sacrament, the name of the Communion doth chiefly and properly belong, as that which doth more nearly join us unto Christ our Saviour, and entirely unite us unto one another. And so his meaning is expressed by Pachymeres an old Greek Writer, who hath paraphrased on the whole works of this Dionysius, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
e Pachym. in Dionys. Hier. c. 3. . Therefore (saith he) did Dionysius call it the Communion, because all which were worthy, did communicate of the holy Mysteries. From which Communion of the Faithful in those holy Mysteries, not only the profession of the Christian Faith, but that sweet Fellowship and Conjunction of heart and soul which was amongst them, got the same name also, and was generally called Communio from that sacred Action which was most solemnly used amongst them at their public meetings. In this sense it is used by St. Augustine, saying, Mulier illa est communionis nostrae 
f August. Ep●. ad Eusebium. , That the woman (which he there speaketh of) was of their Communion. And in another place to the same effect, Donatus non nisi in sua communione baptismum esse credit, That Donatus thought that Baptism was only to be had in the Churches of his Profession 
g Id. in Retract. l. 1. c. 21. . In the same sense it is used by Jerome, speaking of his relations to the same St. Augustine. It is not meet, saith he, that I who have been trained up in a little Monastery from my youth till now, Aliquid contra Episcopum Communionis meae scribere audeam 
h Hieron. inter Epl. August. Epl. 14. , should presume to write against a Bishop of the same Communion (or Profession) with me; and such a Bishop, whom I began to love before I knew him. The like he writes also to Pope Damasus, where saying, that he followed no chief but Christ, he yet acknowledgeth, Beatitudini tuae, i. e. Cathedrae Petri communione cons●cior 
i Id. ad Damasum. , That he was joined in communion, or in love and fellowship, or consent of Doctrine and Religion, with his Holiness, or Chair of Peter.  
In both acceptions of the word, that is to say, In the communion or communication of the holy Mysteries, and in that union of affections which usually is held by those of the same Profession: There is a Communion of the Saints, whether they be Actiuè or Passiuè Sancti; whether triumphant in the Heavens, or finishing their natural course upon the Earth. For the word Sancti also hath its various notions, and must be looked upon in each, or the chief at lest, before we can proceed to a certain issue. And first, the word Sancti hath been used for those who only have the outward calling, called to be Saints, as they are styled by the Apostle, Rom. 1.7. and 1 Cor. 1.2. Though neither Saints by the infusion of inherent holiness, nor by the piety and sanctimony of their lives and actions. In this sense all the Romans and Corinthians, to whom St. Paul wrote his Epistles, were Saints by calling, or called to this end and purpose, that they might be Saints, though there were many profane and carnal persons amongst them. Next it is used for those who are Sancti renovati, Saints by the renovation of the holy Spirit, by which co-operating in the Laver of Regeneration, they are washed and sanctified. And such were also some of you, But ye are washed, but ye are sanctified 
k 1 Cor. 6.11. , saith the same Apostle, that is to say, By the washing of Regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost, which he hath shed abundantly in us 
l Tit. 3.5, 6. , as himself expounds it. These are Passive Sancti, as before I called them; because, both in the outward calling, and the effusion of the inward graces of the Holy Ghost, we are simply passive. But if we do obey that calling, and manifest the grace which is given unto us by our lives and actions; If from our hearts we do obey that form of doctrine which hath been delivered 
m Rom. 6.17, 19 , and yield our members as servants of righteousness to holiness; then are we not passiuè, but actiuè sancti; right Saints indeed, walking in all the Commandments and Ordinances of the Lord without reproof 
n Luke 1.6. . And if the fruit be unto holiness, there is no question, but the end thereof will be life everlasting 
o Rom. 6.22. ; when we shall stand before the Throne of the Lord our God, and serve him day and night in his holy Temple 
p Ap●c. 7.15. , advanced to those felicities of eternal glory, which is designed by White Robes, and the Palms of victory, in the Revelation. Never so fully Saints as then, though we must first be Saints in the Militant Church, before we can be Saints in the Church Triumphant. But whether it be there or here, a mutual communion there is always to be held between us; between the Saints upon the Earth, though Saints by outward calling only, united in the joint participation of the Word and Sacraments, and the external Profession of the Faith and Gospel; but more conspicuously between those which are Saints indeed, not only nominally, but really and truly such, in that harmony of affections and reciprocal offices of love, which makes them truly one Body of Christ, though different Members. And a communion there is too of this later kind, between the Saints upon the Earth, and those which have their consummation in the Heaven of Glories; who though they have in some part received the promise 
q Heb. 11.38, 40. , yet being fellow-members of the same, one Body, they pray for, and await our ransom from this prison of flesh, without which (God hath so disposed it) they should not be made perfect.  
Which said, we may now clearly see in what particulars the Communion of Saints, intended in this Article, doth consist especially, which may be easily reduced unto three heads.  

1. A Communion in the Mysteries of our Salvation, by which they are made members of one another, and of Christ their Head.  
2. A Communion of Affections, expressed in all the acts of love and charity, even to the very communicating of their lives and fortunes.  
And 3. A communion of intercourse between the Saints in Heaven, and those here on Earth, according to the different states in which God hath placed them. All other kinds of Christian Communion, are either contained in, and under these, or may be very easily reduced unto them.   
And first, for the Communion in the Mysteries of our Salvation, and the benefits which redound thereby to the Church of Christ, St. Paul hath told us, That the Cup of blessing which is blessed in the holy Eucharist, and the Bread there broken, is the communion of the Body and Blood of Christ 
r 1 Cor. 10.16, 17. ; and that being made partakers of that one Bread, we are thereby made, though many, to be one Bread also, and one Body, even the Body of Christ; one Bread, though made of many grains, and one Body, though composed of many members. A better Paraphrase upon which place of the Apostle, we can hardly find in all the writings of the Fathers, than that of Cyril. Ut igitur inter nos & Deum singulos uniret, quamvis corpore simul & anima distemus, modum tamen adinvenit consilio patris & sapientiae, suae convenientem. Suo enim corpore credentes per Communionem mysticam benedicens, & secum & inter nos unum nos corpus efficit, &c 
s Cyril. Alex. Joh. l. 11. c. 26. . That Christ might unite every one of us, both with ourselves, and with God, though we be distant from each other, both in body and soul, he hath devised a way agreeable to his own Wisdom, and the Counsel of his Heavenly Father. For in that he blesseth them that believe with his own Body, by means of that Mystical Communion of it, he maketh us one body with himself, and with one another. For who will think them not to be of this Natural union, which be united in one Christ, by the Union (or Communion) of that one holy Body. For if we eat all of one Bread, we are all made one Body, in regard Christ may not be disjoined nor divided. In which full passage of the Father, we find an union of the faithful with Christ their Head, as well as a conjunction with one another, effected by the Mystical communion of his Body and Blood: A double union first with Christ, and with each others next as the members of Christ. The union which we have with Christ, is often times expressed in Scripture, under the figure and resemblance of the Head and Members; which as they make but one Natural Body, so neither do they make but one Body Mystical. Know you not (saith the Apostle) that your bodies are the members of Christ, 1 Cor. 6.15. That ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular, 1 Cor. 12.27. That we are members of his body, and of his flesh, and of his bones, Ephes. 5.30. And doth not the same Apostle tell us, That God hath given Christ to be head over all things unto his Church, Eph. 1.22. That Christ is the head of the Church, Vers. 23. And that from this head all the body by joints and bonds, having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God, Col. 2.19. Occumenius hereupon inferreth, That neither Christ without the Church, much less the Church without her Christ, but both together so united, make a perfect body. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
t Oecumen. in Epl. ad Ephes. , as that Author hath it. Others of more antiquity do affirm the same. For thus St. Chrysostom, Quidnaem significat panis? Corpus Christi, quid fiunt qui accipiunt? Corpus Christi 
u Chrysost. in l. ad Cor. Homil. 27. . What signifieth the Bread? The Body of Christ: What are they made that do receive it? The Body of Christ St. Augustine thus, Hunc cibum & potum societatem vult intelligi corporis & membrorum suorum 
x August. in Joh. Tract. 26. , i. e. He would have us understand, that this meat and drink, is the fellowship of his body, and of his members. What? of the members only with one another. Not only so, but of the fellowship or communion which they have with him that is their head; who though he be above in the heavenly places, and is not fastened to his body with any corporal connexion, yet he is joined unto it by the bonds of love, as the same Father hath it in another place. Habet ecclesia caput positum in coelestibus quod gubernat corpus suum, separatum quidem visione sed charitate annexum 
y Id. ibid. . St. Cyprian speaks more home than either, both to the matter and the manner of the union which we have with Christ. Nos ipsi corpus Christi effecti, & Sacramento & re Sacramenti, capiti nostro conjungineur & unimur 
z Cypr. de Coc. domini. . We are then made the Body of Christ, both by the Sacrament, and the grace represented by it, when we are joined or united unto Christ our Head. Not that we are not made the members of Christ's Mystical Body, but only by a participation of the Sacrament of his Body and Blood; but that this Mystical union and communion which we have with Christ, is most fitly represented by it: For otherwise St. Paul hath told us, That by one Spirit we are all baptised into that one Body 
a 1 Cor. 12.13. , and consequently made the members of Christ. According unto that of Divine St. Augustine, Ad hoc baptisma valet, ut baptizati Christo incorporentur, & membra ejus efficiantur 
b August. de Bapt. parvulorum. . To this, saith he, availeth Baptism, that men being baptised may be incorporated unto Christ, and made his Members. But this supposeth a relation to the other Sacrament, of which, although they may not actually participate before they die; yet they have either a desire to it, if they be of age, and a right or interess in it, if they die in their Baptism; in which respect they may be said to communicate with the rest of the faithful. Concerning which, the same St. Augustine hath most excellently resolved it thus, 
c Id. in Serm. ad Infants, cited by Bede. ●. l. Cor. 10.  No man in any wise may doubt, but that every faithful man is then made partaker of Christ's Body and Blood, when in Baptism he is made a member of Christ: And that he is not deprived of the Communion of that Bread, and that Cup, although before he either eat of that Bread, or drink of that Cup, he depart this world, being in the unity of Christ's Body. For he is not deprived from partaking of the benefit of that Sacrament, so long as he findeth in himself the things (or the res Sacramenti, as St. Cyprian calls it) which the Sacrament signifieth.  
As for the Union or Communion which the faithful have with one another, though that arise upon their first incorporation in jesus Christ by holy Baptism, yet is more completely signified, and more fully effected, by that communion which they have in his Body and Blood. And so St. Cyprian, and St. Augustine, and the rest of the Fathers do declare most plainly. St. Cyprian, as more ancient, shall begin the evidence, and be the foreman of the Inquest 
d Cypr. in Epl. ad Magnum. . That Christian men are joined together with the inseparable bonds of charity, the Lords Supper doth (saith he) declare. St. Augustine generally first, of all outward Sacraments, In nullum nomen Religionis seu verum seu falsum coagulari possunt homines, nisi aliquo signaculorum vel sacramentorum visibilium consortio colligantur, Men (saith he) cannot be united into any Religion, be it true or false, unless they be joined together in the bond of some visible Sacraments 
e August. Cont. Faust. Man. l. 19 c. 11. . What he affirmeth of this particularly, we shall see anon; first taking with us that of Dionysius, an Ancient Writer doubtless (whosoever he was.) Sancta illa unius & ejusdem panis & poculi communis, & pacifica distributio, unitatem illis divinam tanquam unà enutritis praescribit 
f Dion●s. de Eccles. Hier. c. 3. , that is to say, That holy and peaceable distribution of the same one Bread, and that common Cup, prescribeth to them which are so fed and nourished together, a most heavenly union. More elegantly in the Greek, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Which Pachymeres the Greek Paraphrast doth thus reason for, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. e. Because that common feeding together with such joint consent, bringeth to our remembrance the Lords Supper. Nor doth the participation of this blessed Sacrament, produce an union or communion between them alone, who do receive the same together at one time and place; but it doth join and knit together all the Saints of God, how far soever they are distant, and scattered far and near upon the face of the Earth. For therein we profess, that we are all servants in one House, and resort all to one Table, and feed all of one Spiritual Meat, which is the Flesh and Blood of the Lamb of God: The Prayers which are used in that holy action, being so fitted and contrived in all Ancient Liturgies, that they extend not unto those only which do then communicate, but that they and the whole Church with them, may by the death and merits of jesus Christ, and through Faith in his Blood, obtain remission of their sins, and all other the benefits of his passion 
g Collect. after the Participation. ; as it is piously expressed in the Liturgy of the Church of England. To this St. jerom gives a clear and most ample testimony, who being pressed by john the then Bishop of jerusalem (with whom he had some personal quarrels) to go to Rome, and witness his integrity by communicating in the face of that Church, A qua videmur communione separari, from whose communion he had seemed to separate, returns this Answer, Non necesse esse ire tam longè, that it was not needful for him to go so far 
h Hier. advers. Joh. Hieros. . How so? Et hic in Palestina eodem modo ei jungimur; In viculo enim Bethlehem Presbyteris ejus, quantum in nobis est communion● sociamur. For here (saith he) in Palestine, do we hold communion with that Church; and I residing in this Village of Bethlehem, am joined in the communion with the Priests of Rome. By which we see, that whosoever doth worthily eat the Body of Christ, and drink his Blood, according to the Institution of our Lord and Saviour, communicates thereby with all Christian men of all Countries and Nations whatsoever; and that by virtue and effect of the said Communion, they be all knit and joined together as members of the same one Body, in the bonds of love. And this is that which is affirmed by St. Augustine, Non mirum si & absentes adsumus nobis, & ignoti no smet novimus, cum unius corporis membra simus, unum habeamus caput, una perfundamur gratia, uno pane vivamus, una incedamus via, eadem habitemus is domo 
i In August. Epl. 33. , It is no wonder, saith the Father, that being absent, we be present together, and being not acquainted, do know each other; considering that we be the Members of one Body, have the same one Head, an endowment of the selfsame Spirit, and that we live by one bread, go the same way, and dwell together in one House. To testify this Communion which they had with each other, by virtue of the holy Sacrament of the Lords Supper, it was a custom of the Primitive and Purest times, to send some part of the consecrated Elements unto them which were absent, and joined not with them in that action: And sometimes for one Bishop to send to another a Loaf of Bread, as a token of consent in the point of Faith, and in all brotherly love and concord; which he that did receive it, if he thought it fitting, might consecrate and use at the Ministration.  
Touching the first of these, it was well observed by Irenaeus, that when any of the Eastern Bishops came to Rome, the Popes thereof which preceded Victor, did use to send them some of the blessed Sacrament, although they differed in the observation of the Feast of Easter; whereby a mutual concord and communion was preserved between them. Of which he writeth thus to the said Pope Victor 
k Euseb. Eccl. hist. l. 5. c. 24. , Qui fuerunt ante te Presbyteri, etiam cum non ita observarent, Presbyteris Ecclesiarum (of the East he meaneth) cum Romam acciderent, Eucharistiam mittebant.  
And of the other, it is said in those Epistles which Paulinus wrote unto St. Augustine, Panem unum quem unanimitatis indicio misimus charitati tuae, rogamus ut accipiendo benedicas 
l Paul. in Ep. August. Ep 31. , i. e. The Loaf of Bread which I have sent unto you as a token of unity, I beseech you to receive and consecrate. See also to what purpose he sent those five Loaves, which were designed for the said St. Augustine and Licinius, of which he speaketh in the Six and thirtieth Epistle of that Father's works; and that other single Loaf in the Five and thirtieth, where it appeareth, That the Loaves so sent and consecrated, were called Eulogia. Hunc panem tu Eulogiam esse facies dignatione sumendi 
m Id. Epl. Aug. 35. , i. e. This Loaf, you by your favourable acceptation of it, will make to be an Eulogia, or the Bread of blessing, or panis benedictus, in the Latin Idiom. So witnesseth Durantes, a late Popish writer, when as this laudable custom had been much perverted, and that this consecrated Bread (not consecrated for, but after the communion ended, as it is plainly said by Honorius Augustodunensis 
n Honor. in gemma animae. c. 66. l. 1. ) was given to such as had not on the Sunday received the Sacrament. Et pro Communione quae singulis diebus dominicis fieri solebat, statutum est ut daretur in dominicis diebus Panis Benedictus, sanctae Communionis Vicarius, qui & Eulogia dicebatur 
o Gul. Durant. Ration. divin. l. 4. c. 53. . A custom still retained in the Church of France, in which the Bread so blessed, is called Pain Beni; but whether in any other Churches of the Romish Communion, that I cannot say.  
But to proceed, The second head to which the Communion of Saints is to be reduced, is that conjunction of Affections, which is, and aught to be between them, expressed in all the outward signs of love and fellowship, even to the communication of their lives and fortunes. A thing most visibly discerned in the Primitive times, when the affections of the faithful were most pure and prevalent, especially in their salutations, their feasts of love, and other acts of Christian bounty; and finally, in that pity and compassion which they showed each other, when the extremity of their affairs did require it of them.  
And first, Their Salutations were not only verbal, but accompanied with an holy Kiss; mention whereof is frequent in St. Paul's Epistles, where he requireth the people unto whom he wrote, to salute one another with an holy kiss; as Rom. 16.16. 1 Cor. 16.20. 1 Thes. 5.26. With a kiss; that being an especial way to inflame affections, Et animarum quoque mixturam facere, and mingle, as it were, the souls of them that love. With an holy kiss; that is, as Chrysostom expounds it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
p Chrysost. in 2 ad Cor. 13. , not with a treacherous and deceitful kiss, as was that of judas, nor with a lustful and lascivious kiss, as was that of Amnon. Which salutation so enjoined, we find to have continued unto after ages. The Christians of justin Martyrs time, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
q Iust. Martyr. in Apol. 22. , concluding their devotions with an holy kiss. And Athenagoras reports, that it was punishable in his time by the Church's Canons, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, if any man gave a second kiss, in their salutations 
r Athenagor. in legatione. , because the second kiss might be imputed unto sensuality; which shows that the salutation of the kiss was still in force. Afterwards, on some scandal which did thence arise, it pleased the Church to take away the outward Ceremony of this salutation, but to retain the substance and intent thereof, in the continuance of that harmony and accord of souls, which ought to be between Professors of the same Religion. For Calvin very well observeth, that St. Paul's purpose was not to oblige us to the very Ceremony, but to excite us only, Ad fovendum fraternum amorem 
s Calvin. , To the cherishing of brotherly love and concord, whereof the holy kiss was nothing but a badge or emblem. And to this head or manner of expression, we may reduce those lovely names of Fathers, Mothers, Brethren, Sisters, wherewith they used to salute and call each other. This last objected by Cecilius, against the Christians of the times in which he lived; as if thereby he could have proved them guilty of incestuous mixtures. Et se promiscuè fratres appellant & sorores 
t Minut. Felix in Octavio. , said their witty Adversary. But this as they first learned from the holy Apostles, so did still retain it upon very good Reasons, as being all adopted Children of the same one Father, Professors of the same one Faith, and Coheirs of the same hopes of Eternal life; Unius Dei parentis omnes, fidei consortes, spei cohaeredes, as it was well replied by the Christian Advocate.  
And for that reverend name of Father and Mother, the younger people used it as an honourable title due to age, upon the warrant of St. Paul, who adviseth Timothy, to entreat the Elder Men as Fathers 
u 1 Tim. 5.1. , and the Elder Women as Mothers; though otherwise all Brothers and Sisters, in regard of God their Father Almighty. Such, in a word, were the affections of the Primitive Saints, that it was one of the principal Queries, which Diognetus made unto justin Martyr, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
x justin. Mart. Epl▪ ad Diog. , to know what kind of natural friendship and affection, the Christians bore to one another. And vide ut se invicem diligunt 
y Tertul. Apol. c. 39 , in, and before Tertullia's time, was one of the expressions which the Gentiles used to express their wonder, at that integrity and perfection of so rare a piety, as they observed to be in Christians towards one another. Not to say more in this particular, we close this point with that which is affirmed by Cyprian, on the like occasion; Et vix invenio quid prius praedicare debeamus, eorumne stabilem sidem an individuam charitatem 
z Cypr. Epl. 1. , that is to say, It is not easy to determine, whether the firmness of their Faith, or the inseparableness of their Affections, were of the two, the more praiseworthy.  
Next let us look on their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or their Feasts of Charity 
a Judas 12. , as St. jude hath called them, and called them by a name most proper to express their nature. Coena nostra de nomine rationem suam ostendit, vocatur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
b Tertul. Apol. c. 39 , so Tertullian. These, as they were intended to the increase of love amongst the wealthier, and the relief and comfort of the poorer sort; so were they celebrated and performed with an equal piety: Begun with Prayer, concluded with Thanksgiving, continued with frequent readings of the Scripture, and many pious Hymns being intermingled to the praise of God.  
In setting out which Love Feasts, as they spared no costs, because thereby their poorer Brethren were relieved and cherished; so did they think all gain which was so expended, (for Lucrum est pietatis nomine sumptum facere, as the same Author hath it) because thereby they kept themselves in a stock of piety. And yet not thinking this enough, they had their monthly Contributions for relief of the poor 
c Id. ibid. . Which as it was cheerfully brought in, so was it carefully expended, in educating fatherless Children, sustaining old men unfit for labour; in the repairing of their fortunes whom the Seas had ruined, the ransoming of such particular persons as were confined unto the Lands, banished unto the Mines, or locked up in the Common Prisons. No respect had to Country's, and to Kindred less. This made the man a competent object of their bounty, of the Communion of their Goods, that he was a Christian. And yet they had an ampler field for this Christian Piety, than the necessities of private and particular persons; which was the sending of relief to those National or Provincial Churches, which either were in want, or in any misery. Such the Collection made at Antioch, for the poor Brethren of judea 
d Acts 11.29. ; of the Corinthians, for the Saints which dwelled in jerusalem 
e 1 Cor. 16.1, 3. ; and to the honour of the Romans, it is recorded by Dionysius the then Bishop of Corinth, That they did carefully relieve the wants and several necessities of all other Churches; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
f Euseb. Eccles. hist. l. 4. c. 3. , as he in an Epistle unto Soter, the then Pope of Rome; so fully were their souls united, so excellent was the union or communion which was then amongst them, that they all suffered in the miseries of the poorest members, and did accordingly endeavour to relieve and comfort them. Witness their carriage in that great and dreadful Plague which happened at Alexandria, in the reign of the Emperor Galienus, in which the love and piety of the Christian people extended more unto their Brethren, than unto themselves; visiting those whom God had visited, administering to their necessities when they were yet living, embalming them with tears when they were departed, and following them with all due ceremony to the Funeral pile. Insomuch, that even their very enemies could not but praise that noble act, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and magnify that God whom the Christians worshipped 
g Id. l. 9 c. 7. .  
A needless thing it were to tell, how willingly the faithful of those happy times used to accompany each other on the stage of death; how frequently they would make offer of their own lives, to reprieve their Brethren from the slaughter. A thing not rarely known in those blessed days, in which it pleased the Lord to set forth unto us the excellency of that communion which ought to be between the Saints of the most high Ghost; in which he pleased to let us see for our imitation, how much the love of God, and the Saints of God, could work upon a soul which was truly Christian. And therefore it was rightly noted by Tertullian, that as the Gentiles used to say in the way of envy, Vide ut se invicem diligunt, Look how these Christians love one another; so in the way of admiration they did use to say, Vide ut pro alterutro mori sunt parati 
h Tertul. Apol. c. 39 , See how they are prepared to die for one another also.  
And now we have brought this part of the Communion of the Saints of God, which did consist in the Communication of Affections, unto the highest pitch which it can attain to. For greater love than this, hath no man (saith our blessed Saviour) than that a man lay down his life for his friend 
i Joh. 15.13. . Nor had I said so much of a Theme so common, but that I would fain give myself a little hope, that by presenting to the sight of this present age, the piety and eminent affections of the Primitive Christians, it may be possibly revived and reduced to practise in these decaying times of true Christian Charity.  
But here I would not be mistaken, or thought to be the Author of such wretched counsels, as under colour of Communion to introduce a community; or to persuade, that by communicating of our goods to the use of others, we should make them common. Such a Communion as is meant in the present Article, doth aim at nothing less than so sad a ruin, as the divesting of the faithful in the propriety, and interess of their estates, must needs bring upon them. We leave this frenzy to the Fratricellians, who first hatched this Cockatrice, and taught, amongst many other impious and absurd opinions, Nihil proprii habendum esse, that men were to have nothing in propriety, not so much as wives 
k Prateol. in Haeres. Fratric. . But this not getting any ground at the first appearing, was afterwards advanced and propagated by the Anabaptist. Non posse aliquem salvum fieri, nisi facultates omnes in common deferat, nihilque proprium posside●t 
l Sleid. Com. l. , That no man could be saved who brought not all his wealth to the common treasury, or kept any thing several to himself (though it were his wife) was then, if never else, esteemed good Christian doctrine, when frenzy, and King john of Leyden reigned in the City of Munster. And yet as frantic as this doctrine may be thought to be, it hath found Advocates to plead for it, in these later times, and to bring proofs in maintenance, in defence thereof, both from the Scripture, and the practice of the Primitive times, as also from the usage in the state of nature, and the rules of reason.  
From Scripture they allege that place of the Acts, where it is said, That the multitude of them that believed, were of one heart, and of one soul; neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own, but they had all things common 
m Acts 4.32.  A Text much urged and stood upon by some ancient Heretics, who under colour of these words, maintained a community of all men's estates, admitting none to their Communion, who had either Wives or Goods in several, to their proper use; and would needs be called Apostolici 
n August. de haeres. c. 40. , as the revivers of the true Christian and Apostolic piety. And they might have some further ground for it, from the best and purest times of the Christian Church, of which Tertullian saith expressly, Indiscreta apud nos omnia praeter uxores 
o Tert, Apol. c 39 , That they had all things common except their wives; in which, they differed from the Gentiles, who held their wives in common, and their goods in several. Nor was this the continual and general practice of the Gentiles neither, the Commonwealth of Sparta being a right Commonwealth indeed, wherein community of all things was established by Original Laws 
p Plutarch. in Licurgo. , one of the Fundamentals of that Government. And till this Iron-age came in, as the Poets tell us, there was no such matter as propriety, as Land or Houses; Communisque prius ceu lumina solis & Aer 
q Ovid. Metam. l. 1. , The Earth being no less common in the state of nature, before the natural liberty, and rights of mankind were limited and restrained by the Bonds of Law, as was the Air they breathed in, or the light of the Sun that shined upon them. Nor was this natural liberty so wholly abrogated, but that there did remain some Vestigia of it, amongst the more amicable and intelligent men, whose reason could not choose but tell them, that where they settled their affections in a friendly way, they were to interess the party whom they did affect in a joint participation of their goods and fortunes. For that all things ought to be common amongst friends (such as all mankind ought to be by the common principles of nature, and the rules of Reason) was one of the dictates of Pythagoras, seconded by Tully, not denied by Seneca; besides that golden saying of Aristotle, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
r Arist. Ethic. l. 7. , That wheresoever there was friendship, there must be community. But these, although they seem in show to be several Arguments, may all be satisfied with one answer, those specially which are borrowed from the practice of the Primitive and Apostolic Church, and the misunderstood dictates of those old Philosophers. For where the Scripture saith, They had all things common, we are to understand it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, according to the use and communication, and not in referenee to the right and original title.  
The goods of Christians were in several, as to the right, title, and possession of them; but common in the merciful inclination of the owner to the works of mercy. And this appears exceeding plainly by the Text and Story of the Acts. For the Text saith, That no man said of any thing that it was his own, no not of the things which he possessed; which plainly shows, That the possession still remained to the proper owner, though he was mercifully pleased to communicate his goods to the good of others. But this the story shows more plainly; For what need any of the Possessors of Lands or Houses, have sold them, and brought the prices of the things which were sold, and laid them down at the Apostles feet 
s Acts 4.34, 35. , to be by them distributed to the poorer Brethren, If the poor Brethren might have carved themselves out of such estates, and entered on them as their own? or with what colour could St. Paul have concealed this truth, and changed this natural community to a communication (Charge them which be rich in this world, saith he, that they be willing to communicate 
t 1 Tim. 6.17, 18. ,) a communication merely voluntary, and such as necessarily preserves that interess which the Communicators have in their temporal fortunes. And so Tertullian also must be understood; For though it be omnia indiscreta, in regard of the use, or a communion if you will with the Saints, maintained with one another in their temporal fortunes; yet was it no community, but a communication, in reference to that legal interess which was still preserved; and therefore called no more than rei communicatio, in the words foregoing. The like may be replied to the other Argument drawn from the quality of friendship, and the authority of Aristotle, and the rest there named.  
That which I have, is properly and truly mine, because descended on me in due course of Law, or otherwise acquired by my pains and industry; and being mine, is by my voluntary act made common, for the relief and comfort of the man I love, and have made choice of for my friend; yet still no otherwise my friends, but that the right and property doth remain in me. Quicquid habet amicus noster commune est nobis, illius tamen proprium est qui tenet 
u Seneca. , as most truly Seneca. As for the practice of the Spartans', and that natural liberty, which is pretended to be, for mankind, in the use of the Creatures: It is a thing condemned in all the Schools of the Politics 
x Arist. Polit. l. 1. c. 7. , and doth besides directly overthrow the principles of the Anabaptist, and the Familist, and their Confederates, who are content to rob all mankind of the use of the Creatures, so they may monopolise and engross them all to the use of the Saints, that is themselves. But the truth is, that these pretences for the Saints, are as inconsistent with the Word and Will of God, as those which are insisted on for mankind in general. For how can this Community of the Saints, or mankind, agree with any of those Texts of holy Scripture, which either do condemn the unlawful getting, keeping, or desiring of riches, by covetousness, extortion, thievery, and the like wicked means to attain the same; or else commend frugality, honest trades of life, and specially liberality to the poor and needy? Assuredly, where there is neither meum nor tuum, as there can be no stealing, so there needs no giving: For how can a man be said to steal that which is his own; or what need hath he to receive that in the way of a gift, to which he hath as good a Title, as the man that giveth it?  
I shut up all with this determination of the Church of England, which wisely▪ as in all things else, doth so exclude community of men's goods and substance, as to require a Christian Communication of, and communion in them. The riches and goods of Christians (saith the Article) are not common, as touching the right, title, and possession of the same, as certain Anabaptists do falsely boast; therefore no community 
y Artic. of Rel. 38. An. 1562. . Notwithstanding every man ought of such things as he possesseth, liberally to give Alms to the poor according to his ability; and there a Communion of the Saints in the things of this world, a communication of their riches to the wants of others.  
But the main point in this Communion of the Saints, in reference to one another, concerns that intercourse and mutual correspondency which is between the Saints, in the Church here Militant, and those which are above in the Church Triumphant. The Church is of a larger latitude, than the present world: The Body, whereof Christ is Head, not being wholly to be found on the Earth beneath, but a good part thereof in the Heavens above. Both we with them, and they with us, make but one Body Mystical, whereof Christ is Head; but one Spiritual Corporation, whereof he is Governor. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
a Chrysost. , as we read in Chrysostom. And if he be the Head of both, as no doubt he is; then must both they and we be members of that Body of his; and consequently, that correspondence and communion must be held between us, which is agreeable to either in his several place.  
So far, I think it is agreed on of all sides, without any dispute. The point in question will concern, not the quoth sit of it, that there is and aught to be a communion between them and us; but quo modo, how it is maintained, and in what particulars. And even in this, I think it will be granted on all hands also, that those above do pray unto the Lord their God for his Church in general, that he would please to have mercy on jerusalem, and to build up the breaches in the walls of Zion, and to behold her in the day of her visitation, when she is harassed and oppressed by her merciless enemies. How long (say they in the Apocalypse) O Lord, holy and true, how long dost thou not judge and avenge our blood, on them that dwell upon the earth 
b Apol. 6.10. ? And as they pray unto the Lord to be gracious to us, so do they also praise his name for those acts of mercy, which he vouchsafes to show to his Church in general, or any of his servants in particular. The joy that was in Heaven at the fall of Babylon, which had so long made herself drunk with the blood of the Saints and Martyrs 
c Id. c. 18.20. ; and that which is amongst the Angels of Heaven over every sinners that repenteth 
d Luk. 15.7. , are proof enough for this, were there no proof else. We on the other side, do magnify God's name for them, in that he hath vouchsafed to deliver them out of the bondage of the flesh, to take their souls unto his mercy, and free them from the miseries of this sinful world; as also for those manifold and admirable gifts and graces which he hath manifested in them, and those examples of good living which he hath pleased to leave us in their lives and actions 
e Collects for all Saints, and Burial. : Finally, calling upon God, That we by following their good examples in all virtuous and godly living, may come to those unspeakable joys which are prepared for them who unfeignedly love him; that we with them, and they with us, may have one perfect consummation and bliss, both in body and soul, in his everlasting and eternal Kingdom. And more than this, we still preserve an honourable remembrance of them, as men that having fought a good fight against Sin and Satan, have glorified their Saviour in his earthly members; and to the memory of the principal and most chief amongst them, have set apart some particuliar days, that so the piety of their lives and conversations might redound more unto God's glory, and to the better stirring up of the sons of men to serve the Lord in righteousness and holiness (as they did before) all the days of their lives.  
This was the judgement and the practice of the best times of the Church, when superstitious vanities had not yet prevailed; according as I find it registered in the works of Augustine, Honoramus sane memorias eorum, tanquam sanctorum hominum Dei, qui usque ad mortem corporum pro veritate certarunt 
f August. de Civit. Dei. l. 8. c. 27. . And this they did unto the ends before remembered, Vt sc. ea celebritate Deo vero gratias de eorum victoriis agamus; & nos ad imitationem talium coronarum eorum memoriae renovatione adhortemur. Of this, I know no sober man can make any question, nor do I find it scrupled at by any of the Reformation, who have not wholly studied Innovations in the things of God.  
For my part, I shall venture a little further, and think it no error in divinity to allow the Saints a little more particular intercession for us, than possibly hath been granted in the Protestant Schools. That those Celestial Spirits which are now with God, do constantly recommend unto him the flourishing estate and safety of the Church in general, I suppose as granted. The current of Antiquity runs most clearly for it. That some of them, at some times, and on some occasions, do also pray for some of us in particular, I think I have sufficient reasons to persuade me to; so far forth, as by revelation from the Lord their God, or by remembrance of the state that they left us in, or any other means whatever, they can be made acquainted with our several wants. If it should please God to take away a man that is ripe for Heaven, whose bosom-friend is guilty of some known infirmities: I little doubt, but that the spirit of him departed, will pray for the amendment of his friend, in the Heavens above, for whose welldoing on the Earth, he was so solicitous. To think that any of the Saints in the state of bliss, were utterly unmindful of such friends as they left behind, were to deprive them of a quality inseparable from the soul, the memory. And to suppose them negligent of such pious duties as the commending of a sinner to the throne of grace, were to deprive them of a virtue inseparable from the Saints, their charity. Potaemiana, a Virgin-Martyr, in Eusebius, promised the Executioner at the time of her death, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
g Euseb. Eccles. hist. l. 6. c. 5. , That she would pray unto the Lord for his conversion. The story doth not only say, that she kept her promise, but prevailed also in her suit; her Executioner (his name was Basilides) becoming thereupon a Christian, and dying in defence of the Faith and Gospel. Thus doth Ignatius write unto the Trallenses (nor is the credit of the Epistle questioned by our nicer Critics) that he did daily pray for them to the Lord his God, and that he would, not only do it whiles he was alive, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
h Ignat. Ep●. ad. Trallens. , but that he would continue in the same good office, even in the estate of immortality. Origen for his part was of this opinion, That the Saints helped us by their Prayers; Ego sic abitror (saith he) quod nos adjuvant orationibus suis 
i Origen. . So was St. Cyprian too, that most godly Martyr, Sanctos defunctos jam de suâ immortalitate securos, de nostro adhuc esse sollicitos 
k Cypr. de Immortalitate. , The Saints, saith he, though sure of their own salvation, are yet solicitous for ours. Which if it be too general to be brought in evidence, he telleth us a solemn covenant made betwixt him and other Bishops, to this effect, Si quis nostrum prior hinc praecesserit, &c 
l Id. in Epl. 2. . i e. That he who first departed to the state of bliss, should recommend to God the estate of those whom he left behind him. And so far we are right enough in my poor opinion; and if our adversaries in the Church of Rome would proceed no further, the difference between us would be soon made up: The error is not in the Doctrine, but the Application. For as it happeneth many times, that an ill use may be made of a very good doctrine, so in the darker and declining times of the Church of Christ, it was conceived to be a solecism in the way of piety, not to commend our prayers and desires to them, who had so carefully commended our estate to God. And so at last, as there is seldom any medium inter summa & praecipitia, in the words of Tacitus 
m Tacit. hist. lib. 2. , no stop in tumbling down an hill, till we come to the bottom: The Saints in Heaven, against their wills, and besides their knowledge, became the ordinary Mediators between God and Man. And this I find to be the very process of the Council of Trent, in drawing up the Article for the Invocation of Saints. First, That the Saints do pray for us, Sanctos una cum Christo regnantes orationes suas pro hominibus Deo offer 
n Concil. Trid. Sess. 25. ca 2. . And so far Orthodox enough, had they gone no further; but then comes in the Inference or Application, which is all as dangerous; That therefore we must pray to them: Proinde bonum atque utile esse simpliciter eos invocare, & ob beneficia à Deo impetranda, etc. ad eorum orationes, opem, auxiliumque confugore. And here we have the point in issue. We grant, because indeed we must, unless we absolutely mean to renounce our Creed, That the Saints pray for us in the general; as being some part of that Communion which belongs to them, as fellow-members with us of that Mystical Body whereof Christ is the Head: But yet we do not think it lawful, to pray to them, but to praise God for them, which is that part of the Communion which belongs to us. And we grant this, because we may, that some of them, at sometimes, and on some occasions, do pray for some of us particularly, as before was noted; but yet we do not think as the Papists do, That in an ordinary way, they can have notice given them of our present wants, or be made privy unto our necessities. In these two Negatives consists the difference between us in the present Controversy; and though it be in all cases difficult, and in some impossible to prove a Negative, yet we have no small hopes to do it.  
First, for the first, We do not think it lawful to pray unto them, because that by the testimony and confession of the very adversary, we have no warrant for it from the holy Scriptures. Sure I am, that Dominicus Bannes, a Dominican Friar, and one of the learnedst of the pack, doth confess ingenuously, That the Doctrines of the Invocation of the Saints, and the Worship of Images, are neither taught expressly, nor implicitly, in the Word of God 
o Dom. Bannes, 2a. 2ae. Qu. 1. Art. 10. . Orationes ad Sanctos faciendas, imagines esse venerandas, neque etiam expresse neque involutè Scripturae docent, which is as full and home, as can be. And in this case we say in general, as did St. jerom of another, but of different nature, Non credimus quia non legimus 
p Hier. adv. Helvid. , We cannot think that there is such a duty to be practised, because we do not find it any where commanded; and that as we embrace those things which are there delivered, Ita ea quae non sunt scripta renuimus, so we reject those things, whatsoever they be (if pressed as Doctrinals, or necessary Moral duties) which are not written in the same. And more particularly, we say as St. Cyprian did, That to pray in any other manner than Christ hath taught us, is not only ignorance, but sin 
q Cypr. de Orat. Domin. . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. What Scripture (saith Epiphanius, speaking in this very case) doth require this of us? Which of the Prophets doth allow that any man, much less a woman, should be worshipped by us 
r Epiph. in Haeres. Collyrid. ? (and Invocation questionless is an act of Worship.) His inference is, That if it neither be allowed nor required by them, than no such thing is to be done.  
Again, we do not think it lawful, because the holy Scripture seems to be against it. St. Paul hath given it for a rule, That none are to be invocated or prayed unto, but those on whom we do believe 
s Rom. 10.14. . How shall they call on him (saith he) in whom they have not believed. Which Text the Fathers used of old to prove against the Arians, and the Macedonians, that jesus Christ our Saviour, and the Holy Ghost, were verily and truly God, because the Christians did believe in them, and pray unto them. For which consult Tertullian de Trinit. cap. 14. Origen in his Comment on the Tenth to the Romans. St. Basil, De Spi. Sancto, cap. 22. and Athanasius in Orat. 2. Arianos', An Argument no way concludent on the Father's side, in case the Saints may be invoked, as well as he. For how could they infer from hence, That Christ was very God, because prayed unto, in case the Saints were also capable of Invocation? How easily might the Argument have been retorted by those several Heretics, If Invocation of the Saints (who certainly were no other than the sons of men) had been accounted in those times for good Catholic Doctrine?  
And though the Papists shift off this, and the like illations, by saying, That they pray not to the Saints departed, as to the Authors of those benefits which they crave at their hands: Sed ut eorum meritis & precibus orationes n●strae effectum sortiantur 
t Aquia. 2●. 2ae qu. 83. Art. 1. , as Aquinas hath it; but that by their great merits and intercessions, our desires may the sooner be obtained: Yet this will prove no Plaster for the general sore, nor save the common people from downright Idolatry. The Cardinal indeed thus resolves the case, That it is lawful for us men to pray unto St. Peter, to have mercy on us, to save us, and set open to us the Gates of Heaven; to grant us health and patience, and what else we want: Modo intelligamus tuis precibus & meritis 
u Bellar. de Beat. Sanct. l. 1. c. 17. , if so we understand it thus, Do all these things which I desire, by thy prayers and merits. But I would fain know of Bellarmine, if he knew himself, how many of the vulgar sort (whatever may be said of some Learned men) have ever learned, or practised such a reservation; or, if they have, how far it may extenuate and excuse the sin.  
Lastly, We do not think it lawful, because we cannot be persuaded that it stands with Reason; which reasonable men must needs allow some place to, in matters appertaining to the worship of God. And Reason tells us, how improper and absurd it is, To pray to those, of whom we have no certainty that they hear our prayers; but certainty enough, that they cannot grant them: The gifts and graces which we ask for, not being in the power of the Saints to give, as is acknowledged generally in the Schools of Rome. Which Reason is so strong on the Protestant side, That the Papists have no way to bear off the blow, but by an illustration drawn from the Courts of Princes: To whom, since every private subject may not have access, they are necessitated to make use of some powerful favourite, or otherwise to commend their suit, and tender their Petitions, to those which are in ordinary attendance on him. And this perhaps we would not stick at, were our access to God in Heaven, as difficult, as it is sometimes unto Kings on Earth; or, that our Saviour Christ had not undertaken the office of recommending our desires to his Heavenly Father. But we know well, that God hath told us, That his eyes are always over the righteous, and his ears open to their prayers 
x Psal. 34.15. ; not open only as to hear them, but to grant them too, Nisi quod promptè audiat, & audita tribuat 
y Salvian. de Gubernat. Dei. l. , as it is in Salvian. And well we know, that Christ hath called us to him, saying, Come unto me all ye that be heavy laden, and I will refresh you 
z Matth. 11.28. . Encouragement enough for us to go to him, and to God by him; there being no way but by him to his Heavenly Father, as himself telleth us in St. john 
a Joh. 14.6. . Besides, this difficulty of access unto Kings and Princes, and their dispatch of business by their servants, is not, if pondered as it ought, an Argument either of their Power and Majesty, but of their impotency and their weakness. Though they are Gods by office, they are men by nature; and as they cannot come to know the desires and grievances of inferior Subjects, but by allowing others to receive their suits; so should they personally attend the business of every Suitor, they could not eat at all to repair nature, nor sleep or slumber to refresh it. St. Ambrose very happily hath taken off all colour of so poor a subterfuge; whose words I shall lay down at large, as being unanswerably home to the present point. Ideo ad Reges itur per Tribunos & Comites, quia homo utique est Rex, & nescit quibus debeat Rempub. credere. Ad Deum autem quem nihil latet (omnium enim merita novit) promerendum, suffragatore non est opus, sed ment devota. Vbicunque enim talis ei locutus fuerit, respondebit illi 
b Ambr. in Rom. 1. , that is to say, We therefore have recourse to Kings by Lords and Courtiers, because the King is but a man, and knows not whom to trust with the Public Government. But to obtain the favour of God, from whom nothing is hid, (for he knoweth what every man deserveth) we need no other spokesman than a pious soul; with which, whosoever comes unto him, shall graciously be both heard and answered by him.  
In the next place, We grant, that in some cases, as before is said, some of the Saints do pray for some of us in particular; but yet we do not think as the Papists do, that there is any ordinary way to give them notice of our wants, or make them privy unto our necessities. If so, than it is in vain for us to make our Prayers to them who can neither hear us, nor know in any Ordinary way what we pray for to them. And so far it is granted by the greatest Champions of the adverse party, Si non cognoscant nostr● orationes, videtur otiosum & supervacaneum ad ipsos orare 
c Suarez. de Relig. Tom. 2. l. 1. c. 10. , saith their great Schoolman, Fr. Suares. Now that the Saints departed, have no knowledge of our wants or wills (conceive me still of any ordinary way of communication) is evident by that passage in the Prophet Isaiah. Abraham (saith he) is ignorant of us, and Israel doth not acknowledge us 
d Isai. 63.16. . If so, if Abraham himself to whom the promises were made, and Israel the father of all the Tribes, were ignorant of the affairs of that very people which descended from them; what knowledge then should we conceive in the Saints departed, (after so many ages as have intervened since the death of most of them) concerning us, and our affairs, who are so very strangers to their Blood and Families?  
But lest perhaps it may be thought, that the Communion of the Saints supplieth that defect, or that the Saints of the New Testament are invested with a greater privilege than were the Patriarcks of the old: It is assured us by St. Augustine, that they know nothing of our actions, or of our occasions. Spiritus defunctorum non videre quaecunque eveniunt aut aguntur in ista vita hominum 
e August. de cura pro mortuis. , as that Father hath it. More positive and particular is St. Jerome in it, who speaking of Nepotianus, hath this notable passage, viz. Quicquid dixero, quia ille non audit, mutum videtur; cum quo loqui non possumus, de eo loquinon desinamus 
f jerom. Epl. 3. de Epitaph. Nepot. , i. e. Whatsoever I shall speak, doth but seem as dumb, because Nepotian doth not hear me; and therefore, since I can no more speak with him, I will be the longer in speaking of him. And though the Fathers in their Funeral and Anniversary Orations, which they made in honour of the Saints, and at the Tombs of the Martyrs, make many Rhetorical compellations of them, and Apostrophes to them (to which the Popish Invocation of Saints owes much of its Original, as the learned Primate of Armagh very well observeth 
g Answer to the Jesuits challenge. ) yet was it but with ifs and and's, as in that of Nazianzen. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
h Nazianz. Orat. 1. cont. Julian. , Hear (saith he) O thou soul of renowned Constantine, if thou have any sense or notion of these affairs. And now at last the point is brought unto an issue.  
By them of Rome it is supposed, that there is knowledge in the Saints departed, of all things happening in the Earth, that they take notice of our prayers, are privy unto our necessities; and therefore that it were a Solecism in the way of piety, not to address unto them our Petitions. We stand on the defensive part, and so reply upon them with an Absque hoc, Sans ceo, no such matter verily. Let them prove this, (and if they prove not this sufficiently, than they prove just nothing.) and we will either be nonsuited, and acknowledge judgement, or yield so far, at lest unto them, that though this praying unto Saints be the furthest way about, yet we may think it possibly the next way home.  
And first out of the Old Testament, they produce jacob and Moses to give in evidence on their side; Reverend men, against whom we shall not take exception. Of jacob it is said, That in his Benediction of the sons of joseph, he used these words, And let my name be named on them (or called on by them, as the Margin of our last translation) and the name of my Father Abraham and Isaac 
i Gen. 48.18. . And Moses (saith the Text) besought the Lord his God and said, Remember Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, thy servants, unto whom thou swarest by thine own self 
k Exod. 32.11, 13. . To both which Texts (the one being but an Exemplification of the other only) this Answer is returned by Calvin, judaeos patres suos ad ferendas sibi suppetias non implorasse 
l Calv. Instit. l. 3. ●. 20. , etc. That Moses, and the sons of joseph, and the other jews, did not in these and other places of this nature, make any prayers to Abraham, Isaac, or jacob; but only did desire of God, to call to mind the Covenant he had made with them, and in them, to and with their whole posterity; which though it satisfy very fully, as to the objection, yet we will go to work in another manner, and against this, and all the other Testimonies which they either have produced already, or shall produce hereafter to the point in hand, out of the Books of the Old Testament, shall save unto ourselves the benefit of exception; exception not against their persons, but against their evidence. For in the opinion of the Papists, the Patriarcks, all of them were in Limbo Patrum, before the Resurrection of our Lord and Saviour, in the retired and secret Caverns of the Earth; debarred from all access to Almighty God, from all commerce and traffic with us mortal men, in as much want of Heavenly comforts, as those by them supposed to be in Purgatory, though in far less pain.  
The truth or probability of this opinion, I dispute not here, having declared myself in that point already: All that I shall from hence infer, be it true or false, is, That according to their own Divinity, the Fathers before Christ's Resurrection could very ill solicit the affairs of the jews, their children, as being not till then admitted to the Court and presence of the Lord Almighty, nor yet possessed, though sure enough at last, of their own felicities. Bellarmine, that great master of Controversies, hath resolved it so 
m Bellar. de Cultu Sanct. l. 1. c. 19 , Because (saith he) the Saints, and other holy men, who died before Christ came in the flesh, did not enter into Heaven, did not see God, nor could by any Ordinary means understand the prayers of those who sued unto them; therefore it was not used in the Old Testament to say, Holy Abraham pray for me; but men prayed by themselves, for themselves to God, and alleged the merits of the Saints which were dead already, that by their merits they might find success of their prayers unto him. And in another place he determineth positively, for the matter of fact, that though the Saints are prayed to now, in the times of the Gospel, Ante adventum Christi non invocabantur 
n Id. de Beat. Sanct. l. 1. c. 20. , yet were they not prayed unto, or invocated, till the coming of Christ. Finding no better comfort for them in the Old Testament, let us next follow them to the New, in which the Texts most stood upon to confirm their doctrine, are in the 15 of St. Luke. In the seventeenth verse we read it thus, I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in Heaven over one sinner that repenteth. And in the tenth, I say unto you, there is joy in the presence of the Angels of God over one sinner that repenteth. These are the Texts which make most for them, and these, God knows, make very little to the purpose. For first, according to the Exposition of some Ancient writers, the hundred sheep mentioned in our Saviour's Parable, represent the whole body of the Elect▪ both Men and Angels; whereof the ninety nine were the holy Angels, continuing in their first integrity, the stray sheep all mankind which was lost in Adam; for whose recovery the Son of God, that good Shepherd, john 10.10. did suffer death upon the Cross, and so accomplished the great work of man's redemption. For this see Hilary on St. Matth. Can. 18. Chrysologus, Serm. 168. Titus Bostrensis on the place, Isidore in his Book of Allegories; not to descend to later Writers, though Cajetan, and others of the Romish party might be here alleged: Which Exposition, if admitted, overthrows the project; for than no more can be inferred from those Texts of Scripture, but that there is great joy in the Court of Heaven, and in particular amongst the blessed Angels, for the redemption or recovery of lost man, by Christ. But waving the advantage of this Exposition, and granting that those Texts relate to particular persons, yet all that can be logically inferred from hence, is, That the Saints and Angels do know some things, and at some times, which are done here upon the Earth; namely, so often, and so much, as God of his especial grace doth reveal unto them. This is all, and this we will not grudge them; for observe the Inference. Our Saviour, as his use was, spoke in Parables, even in the Parables of the lost sheep, the lost groat, and the Prodigal Son. A certain man having a flock consisting of an hundred sheep, doth lose one of the hundred; and after long search made doth find it, and bring it back unto the Fold 
o Luke 15.4.  A certain woman is supposed, having a little stock of ten pieces of silver, to lose one of her pieces; and, after great pains taken, to meet with it again 
p Vers. 8. . On this they call together their friends and neighbours, and say unto them, Rejoice with us, for we have found the sheep, and the piece of silver, which was lately lost 
q Vers. 6.8▪ 9 . So then, unless the man and woman in our Saviour's Parable, had pleased to call their friends together, and imparted to them the finding of the lost sheep, and the lost piece of silver, the friends and neighbours might have been so far from showing any great joy at the recovery, that possibly they might have never heard of the loss. If so, then certainly it cannot be inferred from hence, that the Saints and Angels, which are the friends and neighbours of those several Parables, are privy to our wants on Earth, by course and ordinary dispensation; but only this, that some things, and at some times, are imparted to them by their God, by way of grace, and extraordinary revelation. No Protestant (as I conceive) so void of Reason, as to make question of the one; no Papist hitherto so cunning, as to prove the other.  
This, though it seem to be a very bold and venturous Assertion, may very easily be made good, though we should use no other medium for the proof thereof, than their own difference and disagreement in the manner of it. A difference or contrariety indeed so great and admirable, that fire and water will more easily be reconciled, than their opinions. Five several ways have been invented by the Schoolmen, and those that since have traveled in the controversies of the present times, by which to make the Saints acquainted with our state on Earth; some false, others blasphemous, and the rest so doubtful, that there is no belief to be given unto them, no building to be laid on such weak foundations.  
The first of these opinions is, Quod sint ubique praesentes 
r Bellar. de Cult. Sanct. l. 1. c. 20. , that they are present every where, in all parts of the world; and so no strangers either to our words or actions. But this (besides the want of sufficient proof) doth trench too much on the Prerogative and Attributes of Almighty God; there being no power Omni-present, but is also infinite, and Omni-presence so peculiar unto God himself, that the Gentiles challenged the Christians of the Primitive times, for ascribing to their God that privilege, whereof both jupiter himself, and all the Topical gods of Nations were conceived uncapable. Discurrentem scilicet eum volunt, & ubique praesentem 
s Minut. Felix, in octavio. , as Cecilius pressed it in the Dialogue.  
The second is, That they are made acquainted with the passages of this present world, Sanctis mortuis atque Angelis internuntiis 
t Bellar. de Cult. Sanct. l. 1. c. 20. , by the information of such Saints as were daily added to their number, and the relation of those Angels which by God's appointment pitch their Tents about us. Which, though it be conjectural only, and is proposed without any proof at all, yet for as much as comes within the knowledge of those Saints and Angels, we should lose nothing of our ground if we closed in with them. But then there are many Prayers and Vows which we make to God, that go no further than the heart, and do not find a vent by the tongue at all; The Spirit making intercession for us (as St. Paul affirmeth) with groan that cannot be expressed 
u Rom. 8.26, 27. ; which only he that searcheth the heart, (saith the same Apostle) can take notice of: No Saint nor Angel being privy to the groans of the Spirit.  
Some therefore are so far transported beyond the bounds of piety and Christian prudence, as in the third place, to make the blessed Saints and Angels acquainted with our very thoughts 
x Bellar. ut supra. . A fancy very prejudicial to the Majesty of Almighty God, and indeed as dangerous as blasphemous; the attribute of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the searcher of the hearts and reins, being proper only unto God 
y Jerem. 11.20. . It is God alone that knoweth the heart, Acts 15.8. He that searcheth the heart, Rom. 8.27. That trieth the heart, 1 Thes. 2.4. Which searcheth both the reins and hearts, Apoc. 2.23. A high Prerogative, not given by any of the Gentiles to their supreme deities, and therefore quarrelled at in the Primitive Christians, because by them ascribed, to the Lord their God, Et Deum illum suum in omnium mores, actus omnium, verba denique & occultas cogitationes diligenter inquirere 
z Minut. Felix. , as by the same Cecilius it was charged upon them.  
The fourth, which is the way most traveled, but of no more certainty▪ is, That they see our thoughts and counsels, by looking on the face of God; in whom, as in some magical mirror, Tanquam in speculo, as they phrase it 
a Bellar. de Sanct. cultu. l. 1.20. , they see what ever things are done both in Heaven and Earth. And hereupon that saying of the first Pope Gregory, Qui videt videntem omnia, videt omnia 
b Greg. M. Dial. 4. c 33. , is grown into a Maxim in the Schools of Rome. But for the proof of this, as of that before, we have no proof at all, but some bare conjectures, or Gregory's ipse dixit, if so much as that; too weak foundations to support such a weighty fabric, and therefore not relied on by their greatest Scholars. Aquinas, the great Patriarch of the Roman Schools, saith plainly, That the blessed Angels behold the Divine Essence of God, and yet know not all things: Nesciunt enim futura contingentia, & cogitationes cordium 
c Aquin. 12. Qu. 12. Art. 8. , For they neither know future contingencies, nor the thoughts of the heart, which belongs only unto God. Thus Martinez, Bene potest videns deum non videre omnes creaturas in illo 
d Martinez. 1.2 Qu. 5. Art. 2. , That one who sees God face to face, may withal not behold in him each particular Creature. Thus Bannes, Nullus beatus videt in essentia divina omnia individua, aut omnes cogitationes eorum 
e Bannes, in 1. Tho. Qu. 12. Art. 8. , No blessed Saint beholdeth all individuals, or the thoughts of all men, in the Divine Essence. And Durand, with a limitation that spoils all the rest, Intellectus creatus videns divinam essentiam, videt in ipsa omnia, quae per ipsam naturaliter, & ex necessitate repraesentantur, alia vero non 
f Durand. 3. Dist. 24. Qu. 2. , that is to say, A created understanding looking on the Divine essence, doth therein see all things, which naturally and of necessity are represented by it, and not else at all. Bellarmine therefore is resolved on another way, which though it hath less countenance from the ancient Schoolmen, yet is by him preferred before all the rest, Vt quae magis idonea sit ad convincendos Calvinistas 
g Bellar. de Beat. Sanct. l. 1. c. 20. , as being fittest to convince and confute the Calvinists; And that is, that all sublunary matters are made known unto them, Deo revelante, by revelation from their God; which is the matter to be proved, and by us denied, but with no evidence made good by the learned Cardinal, for aught I am able to perceive. That at some times they have some things revealed unto them, is already granted, That all things are revealed unto them, is but his opinion, and the opinion of some few of the same society: Others as eminent as he, or they, therein differing from them, who tell us, that this revelation is so made by God, Ut unus alio plures vel pauciores videat 
h Martinez ut supra. , That one Saint comes to know more or less than others, according to the providence and goodness of Almighty God, Qui disponere potest quatenus & quantum se extendat cognitio cujuscunque videntis deum 
i Velofilla. Adu. in 9 Tom. Aug. , Who can, and doth dispose of so great a favour, both to the manner and the measure of the knowledge given; therefore no revelation of all things, to the Saints in general, as Bellarmine desires to have it; but only of some things to some of them, and but on some occasions too, as before was granted. Or were it as Bellarmine desires to have it, yet must our prayers unto the Saints be a fruitless vanity: For what else is it to desire of the Saints or Angels, that they would recommend our wants, and endear our prayers unto the Lord; considering that our prayers and wants can come unto their knowledge by no other means than by such revelation? Little need they commend our desires to him, who must first tell them what we want, before they can solicit him in our behalf.  
Upon such false and faulty grounds have they raised this doctrine, and by that means reduced again into the world an old piece of Gentilism, long since exploded: For if we please to look into the Mysteries of the Pagan Theology, we shall find that they devised a kind of inferior gods, whom they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Deastros, and placed them (as it were) in the middle between God and men. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as it is in Plato 
k Plato in Sympos. . And they devised them to this end, That because the principal or supreme gods were of so pure and divine a nature, as might not be profaned with the approach of earthly things, or with the care and managing of worldly businesses; They might make use of these Deastros or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as Mediators for them in the Courts of the greater deities. Thus the same Plato doth inform us, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
l Id. ibid. : God (saith he) is not to be approached by men, but all commerce and intercourse between gods and men, is performed by the mediation of Daemons. And in particular he tells us, That they are the Messengers and reporters from men to God, and again from God to men, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. As well of the supplications and prayers of the one, as of the commands and rewards from the other. This have we more exactly from Apuleius, whom take here at large, Mediae sunt potestates per quas & desideria nostra & merita ad Deos commeunt, inter mortales caelicolasque vectores, hinc precum, inde donorum; qui ultro citroque portant hinc petitiones inde suppetias, seu quidam utrinque interprete & salutigeri 
m Apuleius de Daemonio Socrat. . We had the sum before in English, and repeat not now. He that desires to see more to the same effect, may find it in the tract of Plutarch, entitled, De defectu oraculorum, and in St. Augustine's most learned and elaborate Books inscribed, De civitate Dei, especially in the eighth Book, cap. 18.21. and in the ninth Book, cap. 9.17. where we shall find this point discussed, Whether in our addresses to the Court of Heaven, we should make use of Daemons for our Internuncios. An error, which it seems began to creep into the Church, upon the first converting of the Gentiles to the Faith of Christ, who under colour of humility, as if they were not worthy to come near to God, would have brought in the worshipping of Angels, instead of Daemons; but were encountered presently by St. Paul himself, advising the Colossians (who as it seems began to be thus inclined) to take special care, lest any man did beguile them of their reward through voluntary humility in the worship of Angels 
n Col. 2.18. . But what they failed to do in the holy Angels, the Papists have since brought about in the blessed Saints, whom they have made their Mediators between God and man, in the commending of their prayers and desires to God, and the obtaining from his hands of such gifts and graces as they stand in need of. And that they might in every point come home to this Pagan Theology in the worshipping of those Daemonia, they do not only pray to the Saints departed, but dedicate unto their proper and immediate service, (as the Gentiles did to their Daemonia) Temples, and Festivals, and Altars, and set forms of worship; and at the last advance their Images also in the Church of God, and give them the same veneration which they conceived was due to the Saints themselves. For, Instans est Theologorum sententia 
o Azor. Divin. Instit. Tom. 1. l. 9 c. 6.  imaginem honore & cultu eodem honorari & coli quo colitur id cujus est imago, as Azorias telleth us for all; so that it is the common and received opinion of the Church of Rome, and not of some particular Schoolmen, as they use to plead in other cases. And certainly, they that shall seriously observe with what laborious Pilgrimages, magnificent Processions, solemn Offerings, and in a word, with what humble bend of the body▪ and affectionate kisses, the Images of the Saints have been, and are still worshipped in the Church of Rome, cannot be otherwise persuaded, but that that she is relapsed again to her ancient Gentilism. It is true, the better to relieve themselves in this desperate plunge, they have excogitated many fine distinctions, as Terminatiuè and Objectiuè, Propriè and Impropriè, Per se & per accidens; which, howsoever they may satisfy the more learned sort, are not at all intelligible to poor simple people. What, said I? That they may give satisfaction to their learned men. No such matter verily. For Bellarimine himself confesseth, That they who hold that any of the Images of Christ our Saviour are to be honoured with that kind of worship which they call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, are fain to find out many a nice distinction, Quas vix ipsi intelligunt, ne dum populus imperitus 
p Bellar. de Beatit. Sanct. l. 2. cap. 22. , which they themselves, much less the silly ignorant people, could not understand. Which makes me think, that sure the Cardinal was infatuated with the spirit of dotage, himself defining positively in the self same page, Imagines Christi impropriè & per accidens posse honorari cultu latriae, That by the help of a distinction, our Saviour's Image might be honoured with the highest worship. But this I do account a fruit of this Iconolatriae, this Image-worship as they call it, that it draws down on them who use it, that most heavy curse, That such as worship them are made like unto them 
q Psal. 135.18. . Now as it is in Bellarmine's judgement with the Image of Christ, so is it also with the Images of the Saints departed: The worship which is given unto them in the Church of Rome, not being to be salved with a dark distinction, which neither the poor ignorant people, no, nor the greatest Clerks which they have amongst them, have light enough to understand. And though perhaps some men of learning may be able to relieve themselves by these distinctions; yet I can see no possibility how the common people, who kneel and make their prayers directly to the image itself, without being able to discern where the difference lieth between their Propriè and Impropriè, or Per se & per accidens, can be excused from palpable and downright Idolatry. Add unto this the scandal which is thereby given unto jews and Turks, and the great hindrance which it doth occasion unto their conversion; who do abominate nothing more in all Christianity, than this profane and impious adoration of Images 
r Sir Edward Sandys Relation of Religion. . In which respect, we may affirm with safety of the modern Romans, what St. Paul tells us of the ancient; viz. Nomen Dei per vos blasphemari inter gentes 
s Rom. 2.24. , that by their means the Name of God is blasphemed amongst the Gentiles. But of this Argument enough, though neither improper nor impertinent to our present business; both Invocation of the Saints, and Adoration of their Images, having been brought into the Church under colour of maintaining that communion, which ought to be between the Saints upon the Earth, and the Saints in bliss; betwixt the members of the Militant Church, and the Church Triumphant, both of them making that one body whereof Christ is Head.  
And under the same colour also have they obtruded on the Church their device of Purgatory, and all the suffrages and prayers of the Saints alive, for those which are deceased, but not yet in glory. For as it seems, the prayers which many of the Saints in bliss, make for them on Earth, is but in way of a requital for some former courtesies, because by reason of their prayers, and devout oblations, their souls had been delivered out of Purgatory, and by that means exalted unto such a degree of happiness, as to enable them to pray for their Benefactors. This is, Ka me, ka thee, as the saying is. If by my prayers a soul hath been delivered from the fire of Purgatory, it is all the reason in the world, that he should remember me when he comes into his Kingdom; or, if he do not, that I call upon him, and put him in remembrance of his obligation. It is true, that prayer to and for the dead, is of larger latitude, than to refer to those only who have been in Purgatory: Our Masters in the Church of Rome requiring prayers unto some Saints who were never there, as the blessed Virgin Mary, the Apostles, Martyrs and Primitive Antiquity; allowing prayers and offerings for the Saints deceased, when as these Purgatorian fires had not yet been kindled. For prayer and offering for the dead, there is little to be said against it; It cannot be denied, but that it is ancient 
t B. Andrews Answers to Cardinal Peron. , saith our Learned Andrews. I can admit prayer for the dead, and deny your purgatory; I can give you reasons to pray for the dead, and yet keep far enough from Purgatory 
u Montague Answer to the Gagger. c. 42. , saith as learned Montague. It was indeed a custom of the Primitive Church, not only to make commemorations of the Saints departed, for the instruction of the living, and honour of the dead, as before was said; but to name them at the time of the celebration of the holy Eucharist, offering to God that reasonable service for them that had departed, and did rest in peace, in sure and certain hope of a Resurrection. To this effect, there is a passage in the Liturgy ascribed to St. james (which as Brerewood 
x Brerew. Enqu. of Rel. c.  very well observeth, was questionless the Public Liturgy of the Church of jerusalem) to this effect, That God would remember all the faithful that are fallen asleep, in the sleep of death, since Abel the just to this present day, and that he would vouchsafe to place them in the Land of the living 
y Liturg. jacob. in Biblioth. Pat. . To this effect, we do not only find in Cyprian, Sacrificamus pro mortuis 
z Cypr. l. 3. ep. 6. , the offering of the Sacrifice of praise and prayer in behalf of the dead; but an express order taken by him that Gemimus Victor who had made one of the Presbyters of the Church of Carthage executor of his last Will and Testament, and thereby wholly taken him off from the work of his Ministry, should neither be named in the Offertory, nor any prayer be made for him at the holy Altar 
a Id. Epl. 66. . Ne deprecatio aliqua nomine ejus in ecclesia frequentetur, as his words there are. To this effect we have this clause, or prayer in St. Chrysostoms' Liturgy. Offerimus tibi rationalem hunc cultum pro iis qui in fide requiescunt, majoribus scilicet, Patribus, Patriarchis, Prophetis & Apostolis, Praeconibus & Evangelistis, Martyribus, Confessoribus, &c 
b Chrysost. Liturg. in fine Tom. 6. . We offer this reasonable sacrifice unto thee, O Lord, for all that rest in the Faith of Christ, even for our Ancestors and Predecessors, the Patriarcks, Prophets and Apostles, Evangelists, Preachers, Martyrs, Confessors, etc. And finally, to this end served the ancient Diptyches, being Tables of two leaves apiece, in the one of which were the names of such famous Popes, Princes, and Prelates, men renowned for piety, as were still alive; and in the other a like Catalogue of such famous men, as were departed in the Faith; as is observed by josephus' Vice Comes, in his Observat. Eccles. de Missae apparatu, Tom. 4. l. 7. c. 17. and by Sir H. Spelman in his learned Glossary. Out of these Diptyches did they use to repeat the names, both of the living, and the dead, at the time of the Eucharist, as appears plainly by that passage of the fifth Council of Constantinople: In which we find first, That the people came together about the Altar, to hear the Diptyches, Tempore Diptychorum cucurrit omnis multitudo circumcirca Altar 
c Concil. Constant. 5. Act. 1. ▪ and then that recital being made of the four General Councils, as also of the Arch-Bishops of blessed memory, Leo, Euphemius, Macedonius, and other persons of chief note, who had departed in the Faith of our Saviour Christ; the people with a loud voice made this acclamation, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Glory be to thee, O Lord. Not that it was the meaning of the ancient Church, to pray for the deliverance of their souls from Purgatory, since they never thought them to be there; but partly to preserve their memory in the minds of the living, and partly to pray for their deliverance from the power of death, which doth yet tyrannize over the bodies of the faithful; the hastening of their Resurrection, and the joyful public acquitting of them in that great day, wherein they shall stand to be judged at the Tribunal of Christ These were the ends, for which the Offerings and Prayers for the dead were made: Which being very consonant to the rules of piety, found such a general entertainment in the Primitive times, that none but Aërius and his followers disallowed the same. Of him indeed it is reported by St. Augustine, Illo cum suis Asseclis Sacrificium quod pro defunctis offertur respuebat 
d August. de haeres. c. 53. , that he and his followers admitted not of Sacrifices in behalf of the dead (the Sacrifices he meaneth, are of praise and prayer;) for which, and others of his Heterodox and unsound opinions, he was condemned for an Heretic by the ancient Father, and so remains upon record. Concerning which, take here along the judgement of Dr. Field, once Dean of Gloucester; who speaking of Aërius and his Heterodox doctrines, resolves it thus 
e Field of the Church, l. 3. c. 29. . For this his rash and inconsiderate boldness and presumption in condemning the Universal Church of Christ, he was justly condemned: For howsoever we dislike the Popish manner of praying for the dead, which is to deliver them out of their feigned Purgatory, yet do we not reprehend the Primitive Church, nor the Pastors and Guides of it, for naming them in their public prayers, thereby to nourish their hope of the Resurrection, and to express their longing desires of the consummation of their own, and their happiness which are gone before them in the Faith of Christ? What Bishop Andrews, and Bishop Montague have affirmed herein, we have seen before, and seen by that, and by the judgement of this Reverend and Learned Doctor, That the Church of England is no enemy to the ancient practice of praying for the dead in the time of the celebration of the holy Eucharist; though on the apprehension of some inconveniences, as her case then stood, it was omitted in the second Liturgy of King Edward the sixth, which is still in force. But howsoever it was so omitted in the course of the Eucharist, yet doth it still retain a place in our public Liturgy, and that in as significant terms as in any of the formulas of the Primitive times. For in the Form of Burial 
f Prayer in the Burial of the dead. , Having given hearty thanks to Almighty God, in that it hath pleased him to deliver that our Brother out of the miseries of this sinful world: We pray, That it would please him of his infinite goodness, shortly to accomplish the number of his Elect, and to hasten his Kingdom, that we with that our Brother, and all others departed in the true Faith of God's holy name, may have our perfect consummation and bliss, both in body and soul, in his eternal and everlasting glory.  
But Prayers and Offerings for the dead, as before was said, are no proofs for Purgatory. The Church of England which alloweth of prayer for the dead▪ in her Public Liturgy, hath in her Public Articles rejected Purgatory as a fond thing, vainly invented, and grounded upon no warrant of Scripture, but rather repugnant to the same 
g Articles of Relig. 22. 1562. . The like do Montague of Norwich, and the Dean of Gloucester, whose words we have before repeated; and so doth Bishop jewel, the greatest ornament, in his time, of our Reformation. And as for prayer for the dead (saith he) which you Dr. Harding say ye have received by tradition from the Apostles themselves, notwithstanding it were granted to be true, yet doth it not evermore import Purgatory 
h Defence of the Apol. part 2. c 16. : Nor doth he only say it, but he proves it too. For bringing in a prayer of St. Chrysostoms' Liturgy, in which there is not only mention of the Patriarcks, Prophets, Apostles, Martyrs, Confessors, but of the blessed Virgin herself, he adds, I trow ye will not conclude hereof, that the Patriarcks, Prophets, Apostles, etc. and the blessed Virgin Mary, were all in Purgatory? Of the same judgement is the late renowned Archbishop of Canterbury, who telleth us, That it is most certain, that the ancients had, and gave other Reasons of prayer for the dead, than freeing them out of Purgatory 
i Conference with Fisher. . And this (saith he) is very learnedly and largely set down by the now learned Primate of Armagh. Where we have the Primate of Armagh in the bargain too. But what need such a search be made after the judgement and opinion of particular persons of the Church of England, when it is manifest that the Greek Church at this day, and almost all the Fathers of the Greek Church anciently, though they admit of prayers for the dead, yet believe no Purgatory? Of which, Alphonsus à Castro doth very ingenuously give this note, De Purgatorio in antiquis Scriptoribus, potissimum Graecis, ferè nulla mentio est 
k Alphon. à Cast de haeres. l. 8. . Qua de causa etiam ad hodiernum diem Purgatorium non est à Graecis creditum. In which, besides a plain acknowledgement that the Greek Fathers knew not of it, there is a very shrewd intimation, that there is little mention in the ancient Latins. Some other ground there must be for the fire of Purgatory, than prayers and offerings for the dead; but what that is, is not so easily agreed upon amongst themselves. Some rely wholly on Tradition, and others, as they build on that for the main foundation, so they bring Texts of Scripture as a second help for their collateral security only, and no more than so. But Friar john Bacon hath declared, That there be others who think that Purgatory cannot be proved by authority of Scripture; that the Books of Maccabees which commonly are alleged for proof thereof are not Canonical; that the Apostle 1 Cor. 3. speaks of that fire that shall purge the elements of the world in the last day; and that touching those words of Christ, it shall never be remitted in this world, nor in that to come, they prove not that there is a remission of sins in the other world 
l Bacon. l. 4. dist. 49. qu. 1. : Nor is john Bacon only of this opinion. For they who carefully consult the writings of our Romish Adversaries, will easily perceive how little confidence they have in those Texts of Scripture, which commonly are alleged in defence hereof; there being not so much as one Text hitherto produced and insisted on by some of that party, but what by others is denied to be meant of Purgatory. And to say truth, their differences are so many and irreeoncilable in all the points and circumstances which concern this doctrine; that the disagreements which they have amongst themselves may serve sufficiently instead of all other Arguments, to confute the Tenet. First for the place, which Eckius will have to be in the bottom of the Sea 
m Eck. in Encheirid. , some in Mount Aetna, others in the Centre of the Earth, and Bernard de Busses in an Hill of Ireland 
n In Rosar. part 3. c. 2. ; next for the Torments, which Sir Thomas Moor will have to be only by fire 
o Lorich. Instit. Cathol. , Fisher his fellow-sufferer by Fire and Water, Lorichius neither by Fire nor Water, but by the violent convulsions of Hope and Fear; then for the Executioners, which Bishop Fisher will have to be holy Angels, Sir Thomas Moor to be very Devils 
p B. jewels Defence, part. 2. c. 16. . So for the sins that are to be expiated in those flames, which some will have to be only venial; others to be the venial ones, and the mortal too: And for the time of their continuing in that state, which Dennis the Carthusian extends to the end of the world 
q Carthus. in Homil. de 4. Noviss. , Dominicus à Soto limits but to ten years only 
r Soto in dist. 19 qu. 3. art. 2. ; others have shortened that time too, if either their friends will hire some Priest to say Mass for their souls, or the Pope do but speak the word. And last of all for the extremity of the pain, which Aquinas makes as violent as those of Hell; and yet the Rhemists say, that they which are in Purgatory are in a more happy and blessed condition than any man living 
s Rhemist. Annot, in Apoc. 14.13. ; Durandus, betwixt these extremes, gives them some intermission from these terrible pains▪ upon Sundays and Holidays 
t Durand. de Office mortuor. c. 7. . By which uncertainty or contrariety rather of opinions, we may clearly see, upon what weak foundations they have raised this building; which probably had fallen to the ground long since, if the profit which ariseth by it to their Monks and Friars, had not kept it up. But I forbear to meddle further in this point of Purgatory, which for my part, I do conceive to be rather a Platonical and Poetical fiction 
u V. Virg. Aeneid. l. 6. , than to have any ground in Scripture, or true Antiquity; The Fathers for the first 600 years after Christ's Nativity, making no resolution in it, either public or private, save that St. Augustine to avoid a worse inconvenience, may seem to some to patronise it. And yet he doth it with such doubtingness, and so much uncertainty, that any man not blinded with his own opinion, may see he knew not what to determine of it. For sometimes it is no more than quantum arbitror 
x August. de fide & operib. c. 16. , for as much as he thinks, and other while, incredibile non est, that it is not incredible 
y Id. in Enchierid. c. 67. : But then he leaves it off with a quaeri potest, as a matter disputable: At other times he goes as far as a forsitan verum, that peradventure it is true 
z Id. ad Dulcitium. qu. 1. ; and yet at last utterly rejects it with an ignoramus; Heaven we do know, saith he, and we know Hell also; Tertium locum ignoramus 
a Id. in Hypegnostick. l. 5. , a third place between both, we can tell of none. He that can ground a point of faith upon such uncertainties, must have more skill in Architecture, than I dare pretend to. But this is only on the by, to show how little the Communion of the Saints hath to do with Purgatory, which neither is a consequent, nor concomitant of it. The Saints may pray for one another, we for their consummation in the state of glory, and they for our welldoing in our passage thither, and no such thing as Purgatory be inferred from either. It is now time, that I proceed to such other benefits as do redound unto the Church from her Head CHRIST JESUS.    

Articuli X. Pars Secunda. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. (i. e.) Remissionem Peccatorum. (i. e.) The forgiveness of Sins.  

CHAP. V. Of the first Introduction of sin: God not the Author of it. Of the nature and contagion of Original sin. No Actual sin so great, but it in capable of forgiveness. In what respect some sins may be counted Venial, and others Mortal.  
IT is a saying of St. Augustine's (in no point so uncertain as in that of Purgatory) that possibly God could not have bestowed a greater blessing on his Church, than making his only begotten Son Christ jesus to be head thereof. By means whereof it cometh to pass, that one and the same person, Et orat pro nobis, & orat in nobis, & oratur à nobis, doth both prey for us, and pray with us, and yet is also prayed to by us. How so? That he resolves immediately in the words next following, Orat pro nobis ut sacerdos noster, orat in nobis ut caput nostrum, oratur à nobis ut deu● noster; that is to say, He prayeth for us as our Priest, he prayeth with us as our Head, and is prayed to by us as our God. Himself is both the Suitor, and the Mediator, yea, and the party sued unto; and therefore doubt we not, when we call upon him, but he will grant us those Petitions which himself makes for us. As Priest, he represents continually to Almighty God the benefit and effect of that perfect Sacrifice, which he once offered on the Cross for the sins of the world; As Head unto the Church, he recommends our prayers to the Throne of Grace, and joineth with his Members in their suits to God, for the more speedy and effectual obtaining of them; As God, he hath his eye still over us, and his ear still open to our prayers, which he hath both the will and the power to grant, so far forth as he seeth it fitting and expedient for us. He suffered for our sins, as he is our Priest; forgives them, as he is our God; and mediates, as our Head, with his Heavenly Father, for the remission of those sins which he suffered for. The medicine for our sins was tempered in his precious blood, and therein we behold him in his Priestly Office; the application of this medicine was committed to the sons of men, whom he by his Prophetical Office authorized unto it. The dispensation of the mercy thereof still remains in God, as an inseparable flower of the Regal Diadem; for who can forgive sins, but God alone 
a Luke 5.21. , said the Pharisees truly. And this forgiveness of our sins, as it is the greatest blessing God ca● give us in this present life, because it openeth us a door to eternal glory; so is it placed here as the first in order of those signal benefits which do descend upon the Church from her Head Christ jesus. For we may hopefully conclude, that since Christ was not only pleased to die for our sins, but doth intercede also with his Heavenly Father, that we may have the benefit of his death and passion; those prayers of his will make that death and passion efficacious to us, in the forgiveness of those sins under which we languish. With the like hope we may conclude from the selfsame Topick, That if we have our part in the first Resurrection, that, namely, from the death of sin, to the life of righteousness, we shall be made partakers of the second also, that, namely, from the death of nature, to the life of glory. For Chrysostom hath truly noted, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
a Chrysost. Hom. in 1 ad Cor. 15. , That where the Head is, will the members be; If therefore Christ our Head be risen from the grave of death, the members shall be sure of a Resurrection: If Christ our Head be glorified in his Father's Kingdom, the members in due time shall be glorified also. So that as well the Article of the Forgiveness of sins, as those of the Resurrection of the body, and The life everlasting, depend upon Christ's being Head of this Mystical Body, and that too in the method which is here proposed: The forgiveness of sins being given us as a pledge or assurance that we shall have a joyful Resurrection in the day of judgement; as that is but a way or passage to eternal life.  
First then we are to speak of the Forgiveness of sins, and therein we will first behold the whole body of sin, in its own foul nature, that so we may the better estimate the great mercies of God in the forgiveness of the same. And for beholding the whole body of sin in its own foul nature, we must first take notice, That it pleased God in the beginning to exhibit to the world, than but newly made, a lively copy of himself, a Creature fashioned ad similitudinem suam, after his own Image 
b Gen. 1.27. , saith the Text. In the creating of the which, as he collected all the excellencies of inferior Creatures, so did he also crown him with those heavenly graces, with which he had before endued the most holy Angels; that is to say, a rectitude or clearness in his understanding, whereby he was enabled to distinguish betwixt truth and error; and with a freedom in his will, in the choice of his own ways and counsels, Ut suae faber esse possit fortunae, That if he should forsake that station wherein God had placed him, he might impute it unto none, but his wretched-self. It is true, God said unto him in the way of Caution, That in what day soever he did eat of the fruit forbidden, he should die the death: But he had neither undertaken to preserve him that he should not eat, and so by consequence not sin; much less had he ordained him to that end and purpose, that he should eat thereof, and so die for ever. And true it is, that God fore-knew from before all eternity, unto what end this Liberty of man would come; and therefore had provided a most excellent remedy for the restoring of lapsed man to his grace and favour: Yet was not this foreknowledge in Almighty God that so it would be, either a cause, or a necessity, or so much as an occasion, that so it should be. And it is therefore a good rule of justin Martyr, seconded by Origen, and divers others of the Fathers, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
c justin Mart. ad Orthod. qu. 58. , etc. The Prescience of God (say they) is not cause or reason why things come to pass, but because these and these things shall so come to pass, therefore God fore-knows them. So that God dealt no otherwise in this case, with our Father Adam, than did the Father in the Parable with his younger son; gave him that portion of his goods which fell to his share, and after left him to himself. And as the Prodigal child being an ill husband on the stock which his Father gave him, did quickly waste the same by his riotous living, suffered the extremities of cold and hunger, and was fain to cast himself again on his Father's goodness 
d Luke 15.18. ; so man not using well that stock which the Lord had given him, gave himself over to the Epicurism of his eye and appetite; By means whereof, he lost those excellent endowments of his first Creation, was shamefully thrust out of Paradise, without hope of return, and in conclusion fain to cast himself on the mercies of God, as well for his subsistence here, as his salvation hereafter. The story of man's fall makes this plain enough, and wholly frees Almighty God from having any hand or counsel in so sad a ruin. For there we find how God created him after his own Image, placed him in Paradise, commanded him not to meddle with the Tree of good and evil, threatened that in case he did eat thereof, he should surely die; and lastly, with what grievous punishments he did chastise him, for violating that Commandment 
e Gen. 2.17. . All which had been too like a Pageant, if God had laid upon him a necessity of sin and death, and made him to no other end, as some teach us now, but by his fall to set the greater estimate on his own rich mercies. So excellently true is that of Ecclesiasticus, though the Author of it be Apocryphal, That God made man in the beginning, and left him in the hands of his own counsels 
f Ecclus. 15.14. . And this is the unanimous doctrine of the New Testament also, where it is said, That by man came death, and that not only of the body, but of the soul, 1 Cor. 15.21. That by one man, sin entered into the world, and death by sin, Rom. 5.12. That by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, Vers. 19 That all die in Adam, Vers. 22. And in a word, That no man ought to say when he is tempted, that he is tempered of God, for God tempteth no man; but every man is tempted, when he is drawn away by his own lusts, and so enticed to do evil 
g Jam. 1.13. . If God tempt no man, as it is plain by St. james he doth not, then was not Adam (that one man whom St. Paul relates to) either tempted by him, or by his purpose and decree drawn into temptation. If every man ought to ascribe his falling into sin and death, unto a voluntary yielding to his own desires, then certainly ought Adam so to do, as well as any, who by his own unworthy lusts, was drawn away so visibly to his own destruction. We might proceed from Scripture to the Primitive Fathers, but that the evidence would be too great to be listened to: Suffice it that we find not any of that sacred number, which ever made God accessary to the act of sin; scarce any of those blessed Spirits, which either of set purpose, or upon the by, did not oppose so lewd a Tenet.  
And it was more than time that they should so do, and that the present Church should pursue their courses; for some there were, some desperate and wretched Heretics, who had so far made ●old with Almighty God, as to make him the Author of those sins and wickednesses, which ill men committed; and some there have not wanted in these later times, who have not only made him accessary, but even the very principal in the sin of Adam, and of ours by consequence.  
Of the first sort of these were the Cataphrygians, the Scholars of Montanus, a wicked Heretic 
h Euseb. Eccl. hist. l. 5. c. 14. . Some also taught the like in Rome, as did Florinus, Blastus, and their Associates; thereupon Irenaeus published a discourse with this Inscription, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, That God was not the Author of sin 
i Ibid. c. 19 . And he gave this Inscription to it (as the story telleth us) because Florinus with great earnestness had taught the contrary. It seems Florinus was an Heretic of no common aims, and would not satisfy himself with those vulgar follies which had been taken up before; but he must ponere os in coelum, break out into blasphemous frenzies against God himself, and vented such an impious Tenet, which never any of the former Heretics 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, had once dared to broach; the Cataphrygians laying but the ground which he built upon; yet bold and venturous though he were, we do not find that he became much followed in this lewd opinion; or that his followers, if he had any at the jest, ever attained unto the height of their master's impudence. Some therefore of the following Heretics, who in their hearts had entertained the same dreadful madness, did recommend it to the world in a fairer dress, and laid the blame of all their sins on the stars and destinies: The powerful influence of the one, and irresistible decrees of the other, necessitating men to those wicked actions which they so frequently commit. Thus are we told of Bardesanes, Quod fato conversationes hominum ascribet, that he ascribed all things to the power of fate 
k August. de Haeres. c. 35. . And thus it is affirmed of Priscillianus, Fatalibus astris homines alligatos, That men were thralled unto the Stars 
l Ibid. c. 70. & 15. ; which last St. Augustine doth report also of one Colarbas, save that he gave this power and influence to the Planets only. But these, if pondered as they ought, differed but little, if at all, from the impiety of Florinus, before remembered: Only it was expressed in a better language, and seemed to favour more of the Philosopher, than the other did; for if the Lord had passed such an irrevocable Law of Fate, that such and such men should be guilty of such foul transgressions, as they commonly committed; it was all one as if he were proclaimed for the Author of them. And then why might not every man take unto himself the excuse and plea of Agamemnon, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
m Homer. Iliad. , It was not I that did it, but the gods and destiny: Or if the Lord had given so irresistible a power to the Stars of Heaven, as to enforce men to be wickedly and lewdly given, what differs this from making God the Author of those vicious actions, to which by them we are enforced? And then why might not every man cast his sins on God, and say as did some such good fellows in St. Augustine's time, Accusandum potius esse autorem Syderum, quam Commissorem scelerum 
n August. de Gen. ad lit. l. 2.27. , That he who made the Stars was in all the fault? Which granted, we may pass an Index Expurgatorius on the present Creed, and utterly expunge the Article of Christ's coming to judgement. For how could God condemn his Creature to unquenchable flames? or put so ill an office upon Christ our Saviour, as to condemn them by his mouth, in case the sins by them committed were not theirs, but his? or punish them for that which himself works in them, or to which rather he compels them by so strong an hand? that of Fulgentius being most excellently, and infallibly true, Deus non est corum ultor, quorum est author 
o Fulgent. ad Monimum. , God doth not use to punish his own actions in us.  
Nor were Florinus, and those other Heretics before remembered, the only ones that broached those doctrines; our later times, not being so free as I could wish from so great impiety. The Libertines, a late brood of Sectaries, have affirmed as much 
p Calv. advers. Liberti. c. 12. , and taught as did Florinus in the days of old, Quicquid ego & ●u facimus, Deus efficit, n●m in nobis est; and so make God the Author of those wicked actions which themselves committed. The Founders of this Sect, Coppinus and Quintinus, both Flemings; and these Prateolus reports for certain to be the Progeny of Calvin, and other leading men of the Protestant Churches. These carne (saith he) è Schola nostrae tempestatis Evangelicorum 
q Prateol. Elench. haer. in Quintino. . Pythagoras could not have spoken it with more authority: Bellarmine somewhat more remissly, Omnino probabile est eos ex Calvinianis promanasse 
r Bellar. , and makes it only probable, that it might be so, but not rightly neither: For Staphylus reckoning up the Sects which sprang from Luther, however that in other things he flies out too far, yet makes no mention of those fellows. Paraeus on the other side, in his Animadversions on the Cardinal, assures us, That they were both Papists, acquaints us with the place of their Nativity, and the proceedings had against them. Calvin who writ a Tract against them, makes one Franciscus Poquius, a Franciscan Friar, a principal stickler in the cause: And we may add ex abundanti, that the said Sect did take beginning Anno 1529. when Calvin had attained to no reputation, no not amongst those very men who have since admired him, and made his word the touchstone of all Orthodox doctrine. So that for the reviving of this Heresy in these later ages, so far forth as it is delivered positively, and in terms express, which was the blasphemy of Florinus, we are beholding for it to the Church of Rome, or some that had been members of it; how willingly soever they would charge it on the Protestant Doctors: Yet true it is, for magna veritas & praevalebit, that some, and those of no small name in such Protestant Churches, as would be thought a pattern unto all the rest, have given too just a ground for so great a scandal. And well it were they had observed that Caution in their Public Writings, which Caesar looked for in his Wife, and that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
Plutarch. Paral. in I. Caesare. , that they had been as free from the suspicion of it, as the crime itself. For howsoever they affirm it not in terms express, which was the desperate boldness of that Florinus; yet they come very near it, to a tantamont, by way of necessary consequence and deduction, which was the Artifice of Bardesanes and Priscillian: For if God before all eternity, as they plainly say, did purpose and decree the fall of our Father Adam, Vt sua defectione periret Adam, in the words of Calvin 
t Calv. Instit. l. 3. c 23. sect. 7. ; there was in Adam a necessity of committing sin, because the Lord had so decreed it. If without consideration of the sin of man, he hath by his determinate sentence ordained so many millions of men to everlasting damnation, and that too necessariò & inevitabiliter 
u V. Synod. Remonstrant. , as they please to phrase it, he must needs pre-ordain them to sin also; there being, as themselves confess, no way unto the end but by the means. And then what can the wicked and impenitent do but ascribe all their sins to God, by whose enevitable Will they were lost in Adam, by whom they were particularly and personally necessitated unto death, and so by consequence, to sin? For thus Lyconides in Plautus pleaded for himself, when he deflowered old Euclios' daughter; Deus mihi impulsor fuit, is me ad illam illexit; It was Gods doing, none of his, that he was so vicious. I hope I need not press this further, or show the true or real difference between the laying the burden of our sins upon Christ our Saviour, as the jews theirs upon the Scape-Goat by Gods own appointment, and laying the whole blame and guilt of them on our own affections. He is but ill trained up in the School of Piety, who will not take upon himself the blame of his own transgressions, and fly to God only on the hopes of pardon. And yet I shall make bold to add, and indeed the rather, that they who first did broach this Doctrine of the necessity and decree of Adam's fall, and consequently making God the prime Author of sin, confess they have no warrant for it in the Holy Scripture. For whereas some objected upon God's behalf, disertis verbis non extare, that the decree of Adam's fall had no foundation in the express words of Holy Writ; 
b Calvin Instit. l. 3. c. 23. sect. 7.  Calvin returns no other Answer than a Quasi vero, as if (saith he) God made and created man, the most exact piece of his Heavenly Workmanship; without determining of his end. Nay, himself calls it for a farewell, horrible decretum, a cruel and horrible Decree, as indeed it is: A cruel and horrible Decree, to pre-ordain so many millions to destruction, and consequently unto sin, that he might destroy them. If then the introduction of the body of sin came by no other means but by man alone, and that the charging of it upon God's Decrees have no foundation in the Scriptures; If it run cross unto the constant current of Antiquity, and that the like Erroneous and Blasphemous Tenets were reckoned of as Heresies by the Ancient Fathers; If it be founded only on the ipse dixit, or the why notes, and Quasi veros of a private man, and by him reckoned for an horrible and cruel Decree: Nay more, if it be contrary to the Word of God, and increase of Piety, and tend apparently to the dishonour of God, and bolstering wicked men in their sinful courses; then certainly we may conclude, that God could have no hand in this woeful Tragedy, that man alone is Author of his own calamity, and can accuse himself only, and his own affections, for giving way to those temptations which brought sin upon him, and not upon himself alone, but his whole Posterity.  
For if we look into the Scripture, we find that sin did not content itself with the person of Adam, as if it had been a sufficient victory to have brought him under, unless in him, his whole Race and Offspring, which were then radically and potentially in the loins of Adam, had been infected also with the same contagion. For Adam is not here considered as a private person, who was to stand or fall to himself alone, without occasioning either good or evil unto any, more than in way of imitation of his great Example: But as the stock of all mankind, who were to have a share in his weal or woe. For being the original and root (as before was said) of all mankind descended from him, whom he did represent at his first Creation; he did receive that stock of righteousness which God gave unto him, not for himself only, and his own particular benefit, had he used it well, but as the common Patrimony and Inheritance of himself and his. And having so improvidently lost both himself and it, by yielding to the motions of that flesh which he was to govern, he lost it not only for himself when he came under the attainture which the Law brought on him, but he did wholly forfeit it for himself and them; his Race or Offspring which were then radically in his Loins, being involved with him in the same perdition. For as the Scripture saith of Levi, that he paid Tithes in Abraham unto Melchisedech, because he was in the Loins of Abraham when Melchisedech met him 
c Heb. 7 9, 10. ; so may we also say in the present case, that all men sinned and lost themselves in our Father Adam, because they were all of them in the Loins of Adam when he lost himself. The Scripture saith not only that sin came to man, or fell on him only, as if the power thereof had terminated in that one man's person, on whom it first did come or fall, but that it came by man, as a Pipe or Conduit, by which it passed also unto others. By one man sin entered into the world, saith the Apostle to the Romans 
d Rom. 5.12. ; By man came death, saith the Apostle to the Corinthians 
e 1 Cor 15.21. ; that is to say, By that one man, our Father Adam, both sin and death found opportunity to enter on his whole posterity. Et per Adamum ex quo omnes mortales originem ducunt, dicitur peccatum introiisse 
f Origen. in Rom. cap. 5. , as it is in Origen. This sin thus miserably derived from our father Adam, we call Original sin, or the Birth-sin, as in the Ninth Article of the Church of England. A sin, because it is a taint or slain in the soul of man, by which we are adjudged impure in the sight of God: The Birth-sin, or Original sin, as being naturally and originally inherent in the very birth; and therein different from the sins of our own committing, which for distinction sake are entitled actual. The nature of which Birth-sin, or Original sin, is by the Church of England in her public Articles defined to be the fault and corruption of the nature of every man that naturally is engendered of the Offspring of Adam, whereby man is very far gone from Original righteousness, and inclined to evil 
g Artic. of Rel. 9 1562. . In which description we may find the whole nature of it, as first, that it is a corruption of our nature, and of the nature of every man descended from the Loins of Adam. Secondly, That it is a departure from, and even a loss or forfieture of, that stock of Original justice, wherewith the Lord enriched our first Father Adam, and ourselves in him. And thirdly, That it is an inclination unto evil, to the works of wickedness, by means whereof (as afterwards the Article explains itself) the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and both together do incur the indignation of God. So that if we speak of Original sin formally, it is the privation of those excellent gifts of divine Grace, enabling us to know, love, serve, honour and trust in God, and to do the things that God delights in, which Adam once had, but did shortly lose; If materially, it is that habitual inclination which is found in men, most averse from God, carrying them to the inordinate love and desire of finite things, of the creature more than the Creator; which is so properly a sin, that it makes guilty of condemnation the person whosoever it be in whom it is found. And this habitual inclination to the inordinate love of the creature, is named Concupiscence; which being twofold, as Alensis notes it out of Hugo 
h Alens. part 2. qu. 105. memb. 2. , that is to say, Concupiscentia spiritus, a concupiscience of the spirit, or superior; and concupiscentia carnis, a concupiscence of the flesh, or inferior faculties; the first of these is only sin, but the latter is both sin and punishment. For what can be more consonant to the Rules of justice, than that the Will refusing to be ordered by God, and desiring what he would not have it, should find the inferior faculties rebellious against itself, and inclinable to desire those things in a violent way, which the Will would have to be declined?  
Now that all of us from the womb are tainted with this original corruption and depravation of nature, is manifest unto us by the Scriptures, and by some Arguments derived from the practice of the Catholic Church, countenanced and confirmed by the ancient Doctors. In Scripture, first, we find how passionately David makes complaint, that he was shapen in wickedness, and conceived in sin 
i Psal. 51.5. . Where we may note in the Greek and Vulgar Latin, it is in sins and wickednesses in the plural number, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as the Greek, in peccatis, in iniquitatibus, as the Latin hath it. And that to show us, as Becanus hath right well observed, Quod unum illud peccatum quasi fons sit aliorum 
k Becan. Man. cont. l. 4. c. 1. , that this one sin is as it were the Spring and Fountain, from whence all others are derived. Next, St. Paul tells us in plain words, that by the offence of one (of this one man Adam) judgement came upon all men to condemnation; and Judgement could not come upon all, or any, were it not in regard of sin. Not that all men in whom Original sin is found, without the addition of Actual and Personal guiltiness, are actually made subject unto condemnation, and can expect no mercy at the hands of God; but that they are all guilty of it, should God deal extremely, and take the forfeiture of the Bond, which we all entered into in our Father Adam. Thus find we in the same Apostle, that we are by nature the children of wrath 
l Eph. 2.3. , polluted and unclean from the very womb, our very nature being so inclinable to the works of wickedness, that it disposeth us to evil from the first conception; and makes us subject to the wrath and displeasure of God. Last of all, we are told by the same Apostle, (for we will clog this point with no further evidence) That the wages of sin is death 
m Rom. 6.23. ; that sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and that death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned 
n Ibid. 5.12. . And thereupon we may conclude, That wheresoever we behold a spectacle of death, there was a receptacle of some sin. Now we all know, that death doth spare no more the Infant, than the Elder man; and that sometimes our children are deprived of life, assoon almost as they enjoy it, sometimes born dead, and sometimes dead assoon as born, Prima quae vitam dedit hora carpsit, in the Poet's language. A wages no way due to Infants for their actual sins (for actually as yet they have not offended;) and therefore there must needs be in them some original guilt, some Birth-sin (as the Article calls it) which brings so quick a death upon them. And this is further verified from the constant and continual practice of the Church of Christ, which hath provided, That the Sacrament of Baptism be conferred on Infants, before they come unto the use of Speech or Reason; yea, and at some times, and on some occasions (as namely, in cases of extremity, and the danger of death) to christian them assoon as born. For by so doing, she did charitably, and not unwarrantably conceive, that they are received into the number of God's children, and in a state of good assurance; which could not be so hopefully determined of them, should they depart without the same. And with this that of Origen doth agree exactly, Si nihil esset in parvulis quod ad remissionem deberet & indulgentiam pertinere, gratia Baptismi superflua videretur 
o Origen, . Were there not something in an Infant which required forgiveness, the Sacrament of Baptism were superfluously administered to him. Upon which grounds, the Church of England hath maintained the necessity of Baptism, against the Sectaries of this age, allowing it to be administered in private houses, as oft as any danger or necessity doth require it of her. A second thing we find in the Church's practice, and in the practice of particular persons of most note and evidence, which serves exceeding fitly to confirm this point; and that is, That neither the Church in general doth celebrate the birthday of the Saints departed, but the day only of their deaths; nor any of the Saints themselves did solemnize the day of their own Nativity with Feasts and Triumphs. First, for the practice of the Church, we may take this general rule once for all, Non nativitatem sed mortem sanctorum ecclesia pretiosam judicat & beatam, That the Church reckoneth not the day of their birth, but the death-day (if I may so call it) of the Saints to be blest and precious. According unto that of the Royal Psalmist, Right precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his Saints 
p Psal. 116.15. . Upon which grounds, the word Natalis hath been used in the Martyrologies 
q V. Ma●yrol. Rom. & alia passim. , and other public Monuments of the Catholic Church, to signify the death, and not the birthday of the Saints departed. And more particularly we are thus informed by St. Augustine, Solius Domini & Beati Iohannis dies nativitatis in universo mundo celebratur 
r August. de Sanct. Serm. 21. , i. e. That only the day of the nativity of our Lord and Saviour, and of St. john Baptist, were celebrated (in his time) in the Church of Christ: Of Christ, because there is no doubt but that he was conceived and born without sin original; and of the Baptist, because sanctified in his Mother's womb 
s Luke 1.15. , as St. Luke saith of him. And for particular men it is said by Origen, Nemo ex sanctis invenitur hunc diem festum celebrasse 
t Orig in Levit. Hom. 8. , etc. That never any of the Saints did celebrate the day of their own nativity, or of any of their sons and daughters, with a Solemn Feast. The reason was the same for both, because they knew that even the best of them were conceived in sin, and brought forth in wickedness; and therefore with no comfort could observe that day, which the sense of their original corruptions had made so unpleasing. But on the other side, those men who either knew not, or regarded not their own natural sinfulness, esteemed that day above all others in their lives, as that which gave them their first-being to enjoy their pleasures; and they, as Pharaoh in the Old Testament 
u Gen. 40 20. , and Herod in the New 
x Matth. 14.6. , failed not to keep the same as a Public Festival. Soli peccatores super hujusmodi diem laetantur, as it is in Origen 
y Orig. in Leu. Hom. 8. . And hereupon we may infer (without doubt or scruple) that having the authority of the Scripture, and the Church's practice, and that practise countenanced by Authors of unquestioned credit, (not to say any thing further in so clear a case from the concurrent Testimonies of the Ancient Fathers) That there is such a sin as Birth-sin, or Original sin, a Natural corruption radicated in the Seed of Adam, which makes us subject to the wrath and indignation of God.  
Thus have we seen the Introduction of sin, the first act of the Tragedy; let us next look upon the second, on the Propagation, the manner how it is derived from Adam unto our Forefathers, and from them to us. And this we find to be a matter of greater difficulty. St. Augustine, in whose time these controversies were first raised by the Pelagians, did very abundantly satisfy them in the quod sit of it; but when they pressed him with the quo modo, how it was propagated from Adam, and from one man to another, he was then fain to have recourse to God's secret justice, and his unsearchable dispensation. Et hoc quidem libentius disco quam doceo, ne audeam docere quod nescio 
z August. adv. julian. l. 5. , as with great modesty and caution he declined the business: For whereas sin is the contagion of the soul, and the soul oweth its being unto God alone, and is not begotten by our parents; the Pelagians either would not, or could not be answered in their Quere, How Children should receive corruption from their Parents, not could the good Father give them satisfaction unto their demand. But as a Dwarf standing on the shoulders of a Giant, may see many things far off, not visible to the Giant himself; so those of the ensuing times, building on the foundations which were laid by Augustine, have added to him the solution of such doubts and difficulties, as in his time were not discovered. Of these, some have delivered, That the soul contracts contagion from the flesh, even in the very act of its first infusion, the union of the soul and body; nor is it any thing improbable that it should so be. We see that the most excellent Wines retain their natural sweetness, both of taste and colour, as long as they are kept in some curious Vessel; but if you put them into foul and musty bottles 
a Matth. 9.17. , they lose forthwith their former sweetness, participating of the uncleanness of the Vessel in which they are: Besides, it is a Maxim amongst Philosophers, Quod mores animae sequuntur temperamentum corporis, That the soul is much biased and inclined in the actions of it unto the temper of the body; and if the equal or unequal temper of the body of man, can (as it seems) incline the mind unto the actual embracing of good or evil; then may it also be believed, that the corruptions of the flesh may dispose the soul, even in the first infusion of it, to some habitual inclinations unto sin and wickedness. Than which, though there may be a more solid, there cannot be a more conceivable Answer: But others walking in a more Philosophical way, conceive that the accomplishment of the great work of Generation, consists not in the introduction of the form only, or in preparing of the matter, but in the constituting the whole compositum, the whole man, as he doth consist both of soul and body: And that a man is, and may properly be said to beget a man, notwithstanding the Creation of his soul by God, because that the materials of the Birth do proceed from man, and those materials so disposed and actuated by the emplastic virtue of the Seed, that they are fitted for the soul, and as it were produced unto Animation. Which resolution, though it be more obscure unto vulgar wits, is more insisted on by the learned, than the former is, and possibly may have more countenance from holy Scripture. When God made man, it is said of him, That he was created after Gods own Image 
b Gen. 1.27. , that is to say, Invested with an habit of Original Righteousness, his understanding clear, and his will naturally disposed to the love of God: But Adam having by his fall lost all those excellent endowments, both of grace and nature, begot a Son like to himself: And therefore it is said in the fifth of Genesis, That he begot a son in his own likeness, after his own image, and he called his name Seth 
c Gen. 5.3. . Though Adam was created after the Image of God, and might have still preserved that Image in his whole posterity, had he continued in that state wherein God created him; yet being fallen, he could imprint no other Image in the fruit of his Body, than that which now remained in him, his own Image only, the understanding darkened, and the will corrupted, and the affections of the soul depraved and vitiated. Qualis post lapsum Adam fuit, tales etiam filios genuit; such as himself was after his Apostasy, such and no other were the Children which descended of him, ●s Paraeus very well observeth 
Paraeus. . And if it fall out commonly (as we see it doth) that a crooked Father doth beget a crook-backed Son; that if the Father look a squint, the Children seldom are right-sighted; and that the child doth not only inherit the natural deformities, but even the bodily diseases of his Parents too: It is the less to be admired that they should be the heirs also of those sinful lusts, with which their Parents were infected from the very birth. Nor doth it any way advantage us in this present case, that our Parents were regenerate, (for so we may suppose) when they did beget us; and being washed themselves from Original sin, by the laver of regeneration, should therefore in congruity be enabled also to beget children like themselves, free from that pollution. For the Regenerate are never so absolutely cleared from this corruption, but that there is a law in their members which doth still war against the Spirit, and that which, as the Scripture telleth us, hath in itself such an unpleasingness to God, as maketh it to have somewhat in it of the nature of sin 
e Heb. 11.6 Tit. 1.15. . It is true, that by the Sacrament of regeneration the guilt thereof is washed away, and man thereby acquitted from the punishment of it; yet there remaineth in us still, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (that wisdom or sensuality of the flesh) as St. Paul entitleth it, whereby we are inclined to resist at all times, and sometimes actually do rebel against the Spirit: Or were it so, that in the state of grace and regeneration, we were all cleansed throughout, yet might our children be partakers of those corruptions which naturally and originally were inherent in us: For let the Husbandman Window, and Rye, and Pick his Wheat with all care and industry, till there be ne●ther Chaff, nor Tear, nor ill Seed amongst it▪ yet when that Wheat is sown, and the stalk grown up into an Ear, those Ears will be as full of Chaff, as was the Seed itself, out of which they came, before such care and pains had been took about it. And so St. Augustine hath resolved it, saying, Oleae semina non oleas generare sed oledstros 
g August. de Pecc. Orig. l. 2. c 40. , That the wild Olive springs from the true Olive Tree.  
What then? may any man complain, as it seems too many did in the time of Chrysostom? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
h Chrysost. in 1 Cor. Hom. 17. , What reason is it that we should be punished and afflicted, it is for him we suffer; for Adam's fault, and not our own, that we are thus scourged. Assuredly there is no such matter; and we may say to such complainers as that Father did, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Not so, saith he, it is no such thing, we suffer not for his, but our own transgressions. The best man hath too many sins, which he is to answer for, besides that of Adam; and therefore none to lay the blame of his guilt and punishment upon Adam only, as if he only had offended, and not we ourselves. There is not one who hath not wretchedly increased that stock of wickedness which his Father left him, adding transgressions of his own, many actual sins, to that original corruption which he had from Adam. And howsoever, we are unthrifts on that stock of grace which God is pleased to give unto us, and ei●her hide our Talents in a Napkin 
i Luke 19.20. , as we know who did, or else misspend them like the Prodigal, on our riotous lusts; yet we are too good husbands on that stock of sin which is bequeathed us by our Parents. There is not a man amongst us, but improves that patrimony, adding one sin unto another, as Lust to Drunkenness, Murder to Adultery, Rebellion to Secret Treasons; Lascivious speech to loose Affections, and unchaste actions unto both: Which though they are the necessary consequents of original sin (unless exceedingly held in by the bridle of grace) so are they daily multiplied, and increased continually, by giving way to our corrupt affections, and following the example of that first Transgressor. Sic instituere majores, posteri imitantur, as he in Tacitus 
k Tacit. de Mor. German. ; The Father's manner of life is the Sons example. So that the followers of Pelagius when they imputed sin unto imitation, had they intended it of actual, not original sin, they had not been much wanting of the mark they aimed at. We are made guilty of original sin, immediately from our own Parents, as they from theirs, ascending till they came to Adam, in the way of Propagation; and make their actual sins our own in the way of imitation. Nor need we press this further, than with that of Origen, Parents non solum generant filium sed & imbuunt, & qui nascuntur non solum filis Parentibus sunt, sed & Discipuli 
p Origen in Ro. Cap. 5. , in reference unto sin and wickedness we are the Scholars of our Parents, not their Children only: But whether it be by Propagation, or by Imitation, or by transcending all examples which have been before us, most sure it is, that we are all corrupt and become abominable, that there is none that doth good, no not one 
q Psal. 14.2. , being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, Maliciousness, full of envy, murder, debate, malignity 
r Rom. 1.29. , insomuch as from the Crown of the head to the sole of the foot, there is nothing but swellings, and soars, and putrefaction 
s Isa. 1.6. . More sure it is, that even our righteousness is but like to a menstruous cloth, and that our justest actions are not able to endure the trial, if they should come to be weighed in the sight of God, by the severity of the Law, and the exact balance of the Sanctuary. Vae enim laudabili hominum vitae, si remotâ misericordiâ discutias eam 
t August. Conf. lib. 9.13. ; Woe, saith Augustine, to the most commendable part of all our lives, should not God look upon us with the eyes of mercy, and through the Spectacles of the merits of our Lord CHRIST JESUS.  
Not to insist longer on those curiosities, which are and may be made by unquiet men, about the Introduction, Propagation, and universal overspreading of the body of sin, we must resolve, as he that fell into a pit did resolve the Passenger who was inquisitive to know how he came into it. At ille, obsecro inquit tecum cogita, quomodo hinc me liberes, etc. 
u Id ibid.  My friend, said the poor fellow, take no care to learn how I fell into it, but do the best you can to help me out of it. That we are fallen into the pit, not only of Original but of Actual filthiness, we all know too well; and we know too, that we first fell into it by the fault of our Father Adam, but have since plunged ourselves more deeply in the mire of sin, than Adam by his personal error could have brought upon us. If we are yet unsatisfied with the manner how, notwithstanding all that hath been formerly here delivered, and may be elsewhere found in the Ancient writers, we may do well to take as much care as we can for our getting out, and not molest ourselves and others with those needless questions, which have been made about the manner of our falling in.  
And this is that which we are next to go in hand with. For if there were no way to get out of this pit, the knowledge which we have of our falling in, and of the condition we lie under till we be delivered, would so perplex us and afflict us, that Christians of all men would be most miserable. But so it is, that God of his great goodness and love to man hath so provided, that no man can complain that he wants help to get out, if he be not wanting to himself, but will stretch out his hand and lay hold of such means as are by God prepared to that end and purpose. If we sing Domine de profundis, and call upon him out of the deeps of our sin and misery, no doubt but he will hear our voice 
x Psal. 130.2. & ver. 7, 8. , and take pity on us, for with him there is mercy, saith the Royal Psalmist, with him is plenteous redemption, sufficient to deliver Israel from all his sins. The pit of sin is deep, that of mercy bottomless, a kind of Puteus inexhaustus, a Well which can never be drawn dry, as the Pope said of England, when at his devotion. Though man sin grievously and unpardonably in the sight of others, yet hath God mercy still in store for the greatest sinner; God's goodness being so transcendent as not to be exhausted by man's maliciousness. Bonitas invicti non vincitur 
y Fulgen. ad Monimum. , said Fulgentius rightly. Those of the Church of Rome have made a difference of sins, accounting some to be venial, others mortal; which terms we well enough approve of, rightly understood; but I approve not the distinction of some Protestant Doctors, of remissible and irremissible 
z Vrsin. Catech. part 1. qu. 7. , of sins which may be pardoned, and of sins that may not. First, We deny not the distinction of venial and mortal sins, rightly understood, but do think that some sins are fitly said to be mortal, and some venial, because some are forgiven, some not, according to the quality of the sin, and the party sinning. Not that we think that some are worthy in themselves of eternal punishment, and others but of temporal only, whereof the first are counted mortal, and the others venial, as the Papists think: but that some sins either in respect of the matter wherein men offend, or ex imperfectione actus, in that they are not committed with a full consent, are not so inconsistent with the Spirit of Grace, but that the Spirit of Grace still remaining in him, which doth them, and preserves him in the good opinion and esteem of God. These we may call Peccata quotidianae incursionis, sins of daily incursion, vain thoughts, and idle words, and unseemly motions; which the best men are subject to at some time or other. And if God were extreme in marking what is done amiss (in these several ways) no flesh were able to abide it 
a Psal. 130.3. . He that is faulty in these kinds, though he deserve punishment, and eternal punishment at the hands of God, if God should take advantage of the Law against him, yet shall his punishment be less, and his stripes far fewer, than it shall be in those who transgress maliciously, and sin with an high hand of presumptuous wickedness. We have not so much of the Stoic as to make sins equal, or to maintain peccata omnia sunt aequalia, in the way of Paradox, as once Tully did, though the Papists falsely charge it on us. For though we use not the distinction in their sense and meaning, yet neither do we say that all sins are equal, and of like deformity, or in the same degree of contrariety with the grace of God; or that they have the same effects, and shall be punished at the last with the like extremity. Only we take it for a dangerous and presumptuous doctrine, to teach that any sin (if properly and truly sin) is venial, in and of itself, without true repentance, as that which doth include nothing offensive to God, or is meritorious of his judgements. For Almain one of their great Doctors doth affirm expressly, that it is a question amongst the Schoolmen, whether there be any such sin or not 
b Alnain. Moral. tract. 3. c. 20. ? And himself concludeth out of Gerson, that no sin is venial of itself, but only through the mercy of God; it being a contradiction that God should forbid an act under a penalty, and when he hath done, that act should not be mortal in its own nature; because being thus forbidden, it is against the Law of God, and that which is against God's Law, must needs be infinitely evil, and by consequence mortal. And so it is also in respect of the party sinning; For as Cajetan hath well observed 
c Cajetan ap. Field of the Ch. l. 3. c. 9 , That which doth positively make sin venial, or not venial, is the state of the subject wherein it is found. If therefore we respect the nature of sin as it is in itself, without grace, it will remain eternally in stain or guilt, and so subject the sinner to eternal punishment: But yet such is the nature of some sins, either in regard of the matter wherein they are conversant, or their not being done with full consent, that they do not necessarily imply an exclusion of Grace out of the subject in which they are found, and so do not necessarily put the doers of them into such a state which positively makes them not to be venial, by removing grace, which is the fountain of remission. So that no sin is positively venial, as having any thing in itself which may claim remission, because it hath not any thing of Grace from whence all remission doth proceed; though many sins ex genere, or ex imperfectione actus (as before was said) that is to say, in reference to the matter wherein man offendeth, or to the manner, as not done with a full consent, may be said to be venial negative, and per non ablationem principii remissionis, in that it doth not necessarily imply the exclusion of grace, by the exclusion of which grace from the souls of men, sins are named mortal. For being that Grace only is the fountain whence remission springs; nothing can make sin positively venial, but to be in Grace, nor nothing make it positively mortal, but to be out of the state of Grace. And so we see that some sins may be called venial, according to the quality of the sin, and the party sinning, in that they bring not always with them eternal punishment, though possibly not repent of particularly: and that all sins are venial ex eventu too (though otherwise mortal in themselves) in that there is no sin so great, but by the blood of Christ, and sincere repentance, may ●e done away, and freely pardoned by the merciful goodness of the Lord our God, who desireth not the death of a sinner, but rather that he should turn from sin and be saved.  
For that there is no sin so great which is unpardonable or irremissible in respect of God, the infinitness of his mercy over all his works, his graciousness in pardoning David's Murder, Solomon's Idolatries, Paul's Persecuting of his Church, Peter denying of his Master, and thousands of the like examples do most clearly evidence. If ever men had reason to despair of pardon, none I am certain could have more than those we did so wilfully and maliciously imbrue their hands in the most innocent blood of our Lord and Saviour; yet when their hearts were touched at St. Peter's Sermon, so that they asked him, What they were to do, that they might be saved 
e Acts 2.37, 38. , He presently chalked them out a way, by Baptism and Repentance to obtain the remission of sins, even of that bloody sin itself, of crucifying by their wicked hands the Lord of glory. If any had more reason to despair than they, it must be none but such of the Scribes and Pharisees, who saying that our Saviour Christ had cast out Devils by Beelzebub the Prince of Devils, may properly be said to have blasphemed against the Holy Ghost, and consequently to have committed such a sin, as in the judgement of our Saviour is pronounced unpardonable. He that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, as St. Luke expressly 
f Luke 12.10. . And yet St. Ambrose is so charitable, as to think, that some of them were pardoned 
g Ambr. de Poenit. l. 2. c. 4. ; it being probable, that some of those very Scribes and Pharisees were present at St. Peter's Sermon, and so within the compass of repentance and forgiveness of sins. And then withal we may observe, that though it be expressly said, That the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven, yet it may well be understood with a qualification; impossibility being sometimes used in holy Scripture to denote a difficulty: As where it is affirmed, as positively, and expressly, to be impossible for a rich man to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven 
h Matth. 19.24, 25. . Where certainly it was not the intent of Christ, utterly to exclude all rich men from the hopes of Heaven; but only to declare how hard and difficult it was for those who trusted in their riches, and wallowed in the pride and pleasures of a prosperous fortune, to set their minds upon the blessings of eternal life. And so it is also in the present case, in St. Chrysostoms' judgement, Ideo dici nunquam remitti 
i Chrysost. in Matth. 12.31. , quia difficilius remittitur, Of the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, saith he, it is therefore said, that it shall never be forgiven, because it is more hardly pardoned, and with greater difficulty, than any other sin whatever. And that this qualification, or the like, is to be admitted, appears yet further by the words which are next before it, and to which, these in question must needs have relation; where it is said, That all sins, and all blasphemies shall be forgiven unto men. In which he did not, could not mean, that all sins, and at all times, should be pardoned to all sorts of men; for than no sin were damnable, but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, which is most untrue. Therefore the sense must be in both, That all sins ordinarily, & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, shall be forgiven unto men upon true repentance, but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not so ordinarily be forgiven, or shall more hardly be forgiven, than any other. Not that it cannot be forgiven at all▪ Non utique quod remitti non possit, as most truly Maldonat 
k Mald. in Matth. 12. : But because they who do blaspheme against the Holy Ghost, Nullam peccati sui excusationem habent, have seldom any thing to allege in excuse thereof, and so were more unpardonable than other men.  
As for those passages pretended from the holy Scripture in maintenance of the irremissibility of some kind of sin, and in particular of this against the power of the Holy Ghost, they neither prove the point which they are produced for, nor were intended by the Sacred Penmen of the Word of God, of that sin or blasphemy. In the first place, it is alleged from St. Paul to the Hebrews, To be impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, if they shall fall away, to renew them again to repentance, seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh 
l Heb. 6.4, 6. . But this the Fathers understand not of a difficulty or impossibility of admitting such men unto repentance, but that they could not be admitted to a second Baptism, and thereby to be renovated, and illuminated, to die, be buried, and rise a second time in Christ, in so facile and complete a washing of sin, as the Sacrament of Regeneration did afford at first. Chrysostom is express for this 
m Chrysost. in locum. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, He doth not take away repentance, but a second Baptism. St. Ambrose also saith the same, and sheweth that the meaning of this Text is, and must be, De non iterando baptismate 
n Ambr. de Poenit. l. 2. c. 2. , not of repelling sinners from the thought of repentance, and the remission of their sins by the Church's Ministry, as the Novatians falsely taught; but of the not admitting them to a second Baptism, which some began to introduce upon that occasion. And that the Apostle speaks of a second Baptism, is evident by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or illuminatos, which was used anciently to signify those that were baptised 
o Dionys. in Hierarch. Eccl. Passim. , as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or illumination, for Baptism, the very Sacrament itself. Secondly, by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or renovare, which intimates or implies our renovation by that holy Sacrament. Per lavachrum enim renovamur per quod renascimur 
p Ambr. ubi supra. , as St. Ambrose notes it, We are renewed by the laver of regeneration, by which we are newborn to the life of righteousness. And thirdly, from the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of crucifying again the Lord of life, our Baptism being as the figure of his death or crucifixion, in which our old man is crucified with him, as St. Paul hath told us 
q Rom. 6.6, 4. , That the body of sin might be destroyed, and buried in his grave by Baptism. And thereupon if followeth by St. Paul's illation, Non magis quenquam bis baptizari, quam Christum bis crucifigi posse 
r Heins▪ Annot. in Heb 6. , saith the learned Knight Sir Daniel Heinsius, That the impiety is as great for a man to be baptised again, as if Christ should again be crucified. The like may be affirmed of a second Text alleged from the same Apostle 
s Heb. 10.26. , where it is said, That if we sin wilfully, after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sin. Which Text, as that before, is applied by Calvin to such as fall away from the Faith and Gospel, whom he excludes utterly from all hope of pardon, as men that sin against the holy Spirit of God; but very wrongfully in all.  
For first, although we read it wilfully in our last Translation, yet is it only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek originals; which Beza rendereth uliro, the Vulgar Latin, voluntario, our old Translation, willingly, as the Rhemists do. And to say truth, the word doth signify no more, though to comply with Calvin's Comment on the Text, our last Translators who inclined too much unto his opinions, do now read it wilfully. And if it be but willingly, as indeed it is not, I would know in what a desperate estate we Christians were, if every sin which is committed willingly, after truth embraced, shall either be reputed in the sight of God for the sin against the Holy Ghost, or utterly past hope of pardon. Nor is the case much better, if we read it wilfully, though better with some sort of men, than it is with others. For miserable were the state of us mortal men, if every sin that is committed wilfully (which too often happeneth) either against the truth of science, or the light of conscience, should make a man uncapable of the mercy of God, as one that blasphemed or sinned (take which word you will) against the power and virtue of the Holy Ghost. A doctrine never countenanced in the Primitive times; the Church extending her indulgence to the worst of Heretics, and opening both her arms and bosom unto those Apostates, which with true sorrow for their sins, did return unto her; condemning the Novatians for too rigid and severe in their bitter Tenet, touching the non-admittance of them unto public penance, and after that unto the Sacraments of the Church again. Which being premised, the meaning of the Text will appear to be only this, That they who willingly offend, after they have received the knowledge of the truth, and Gospel, must not expect another Christ to die for them; or, that he who died once for their sins, should again die for them. St. Ambrose and St. Chrysostom do expound it so: Out of whom, Clictoveus in his Continuation of St. Cyrils' Commentaries upon the Gospel of St. john, informs us, That the Apostle doth not hereby take away the second or third remission of sins (for he is not such an enemy to our Salvation) but saith only that Christ our Sacrifice shall not be offered any more upon the Cross, for the man so sinning 
t Cyril in Joh. l. 5. c. 17. . And this is further proved to be the very meaning of the Apostle in the place disputed, out of the scope and purpose of his discourse; which was to show unto the jews, that it was not with them now, as it was under the Law: For under the Law they had daily Sacrifices for their sins, but under the Gospel they had but one Sacrifice once for all 
Heb. 10.11. . Every Priest (saith he) doth stand daily ministering, and offering often times the same sacrifice; but this man (JESUS) after he had offered one sacrifice, sat down for ever at the right-hand of God; than which, there cannot be a clearer explanation of the Text in question. Though Sacrifices were often reiterated in the times of the Law, Hic vero nec baptismus repetitur, neque Christus bis, nisi cum ludibrio mori pro peccato; yet neither is Baptism to be reiterated in the times of the Gospel, nor can Christ be exposed for sin, to a second death, without a great deal of scorn, as Heinsius hath observed from Chrysostom 
x Heins.. Annot. in Heb. 6. . Some light doth also rise to this Exposition, from the words immediately succeeding, where the Apostle speaks of a certain expectation of a fearful judgement; Which joined unto the former verse, have this sense between them, That he which doth not put his whole trust and confidence in the sufficiency of the Sacrifice already offered, but for every sin expects a new Sacrifice also, must look for nothing in the end, but a fearful judgement, which most undoubtedly first or last shall fall upon him.  
The third and last place, which is commonly alleged for proof that there are some sins irremissible in their own nature, is that of St. john, If any man (saith he) see his brother sin a sin, which is not unto death, he shall ask, and God shall give life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death, I do not say he shall pray for it 
y 1 John 5.16. . In which words we find two sorts of sins, a sin to death, and a sin that is not to death; a sin which is not unto death, for the remission of the which a man is bound to pray in behalf of his Brother; a sin to death, concerning which it seems unlawful for one man to pray for another. And yet it doth but seem so neither: For the Apostles words, I do not say he shall pray for it, amount not to a Negative, that he shall not pray for it, as the fautors of the contrary opinion would full gladly have it; 〈◊〉 ●ather to a toleration, that they might pray if they would, the business being of 〈◊〉 a nature, that the Apostle had no mind to encourage them in it, because he could not promise them the success desired; but leaving every man to himself, to pray, or not to pray, as his affections to the party, or Christian pity of the case might induce him to. That by peccatum ad mortem somewhat more is meant than ordinary mortal sins, is a thing past question; but what it is, is not so easy to discover. St. Augustine will have the sin, which is here called a sin unto death, to be that sin wherein a man continueth until his death without repentance 
z August. de corrept. & great. c. 12. ; but adds withal, That in as much as the name of the sin is not expressed, many and different things may be thought to be it. Pacianus an old Catholic writer, interprets it of peccata manentia 
a Pacian. Epl. 3. , Such sins as men continue in till the hour of death. St. jerom reckoneth such men to commit this sin, Qui in sceliribus permanent, who abide in their wickedness, and express no sense nor sorrow of their lost estate. The Protestant writers do expound it generally of the sin against the Holy Ghost; For which, say they, no man ought to pray, because our Saviour hath testified it to be irremissible 
b Fulk. on the Rhemist. Test. 1 Joh. 5.16. . And to this end, they do allege a place from jerom, affirming, Stultum esse pro eo orare qui peccaverit ad mortem, That it is a foolish thing to pray for him which sins unto death, because the man that is marked out to some visible ruin, nullis precibus erui potest, cannot possibly be reprieved by prayer. But herein jerom is not consonant to himself elsewhere; for in another place he telleth us, with more probability, that nothing else is here meant, but that a prayer for such a sin (whatsoever it be) is very difficulty heard 
c jerom. . And this I take to be the truer, or at least the more probable meaning of the Apostle, who saith immediately before, This is the confidence which we have in him, that if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us, 1 john 5.14. And therefore lest we should conceive that this holds true in all Petitions whatsoever, which we make for others, he adds, That if it be a great sin, such as is not ordinarily forgiven, but punished with death, I dare not say, that you can either pray with confidence, or that I can give you any great hopes of prevailing in it. According as God said to the Prophet jeremy, Pray not for this people, for I will not hear thee 
d Jere. 7.16. . And though St. Augustine sometimes thought this sin to be final impenitency, or a continuance in sin till death without repentance, yet in his Book of Retractations, he resolves the contrary, affirming, That we must despair of no body, no not of the wickedest, as long as he lives; and that we may safely pray for him, of whom we do not despair 
c Aug. Retract. . So that for aught we see by these Texts of Scripture, there is no sin which properly may be said to be irremissible. And therefore I resolve with Maldnonate, though he were a jesuit 
f Maldon. in Matth. 12. , Tenendam esse regulam fidei, quae nullum peccatum esse docet quod à Deo remitti non possit, That it is to be embraced as a rule of Faith, that there is no sin so great (whatsoever it be) which God cannot pardon; for which, if heartily bewailed and repent of, there is no mercy and forgiveness to be found from God. I shut up all with that of the Christian Poet 
g ●rudens. Hamart in fu●●. .  
Spem capio sore quicquid ago, veniabile apud te,  
Quamlibet indignum venia faciamve loquarve.  
In English thus.  
My words (O Christ) and deeds, I hope, with thee,  
Though they deserve no pardon, venial be.   

CHAP. VI Of the Remission of sins by the Blood of Christ, and of the Abolition of the body of sin by Baptism and Repentance. Of confession made unto the Priest, and the Authority Sacerdotal.  
THus have we in the former Chapter discoursed at large of the Introduction and Propagation of Sin, and of the several species or kinds thereof; and also proved, by way of groundwork and foundation, that albeit sin in its own nature be so odious in the sight of God, as to draw upon the sinner everlasting damnation; yet that there is no sin so mortal, so deserving death, which is not capable of pardon or forgiveness by the mercy of God. We next descend unto those means, whereby the pardon and remission of our sins is conveyed unto us; the means by which so great a benefit is estated on us. The principal agent in this work is Almighty God, of whom the Scripture saith expressly, That it is one God which shall justify the circumcision by Faith, and the uncircumcision through Faith 
a Rom. 3. ●0. & 8.33. ; that it is God which justifieth the Elect; and that the Scriptures did foresee, That God would justify the Heathen 
b Gal. 3. ●. . In all which Texts, to justify the Elect, the jews, the Gentiles, doth import no more, than freely to forgive them all the sins which they had committed against the Law, and to acquit them absolutely from all blame and punishment, due by the Law to such offences. Which appears plainly by that passage of the same Apostle, where speaking of Almighty God, as of him that justifieth the ungodly, Rom. 4.5. he showeth immediately by way of gloss or exposition, in what that justifying doth consist, saying out of David, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered: Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin 
c Rom. 4.7, 8. . And this God doth, not out of any superadded or acquired principle, which is not naturally in him; but out of that authority and supreme power which is natural and essential to him: In which respect, no Creature can be said to forgive sins, no not our Saviour Christ himself, in his mere humane nature; but must refer that work unto God alone: For who can (so) forgive sins, but God only, said the Pharisees truly 
d Mark 2.7. . And as God is the only natural and efficient cause of this justification, the principal Agent in this great work of the remission of sins; so is the only moral and internal impulsive cause which inclines him to it, to be found only in himself; that is to say, his infinite mercy, love, and graciousness, toward his poor creature, Man, whom he looks on as the miserable object of grace and pity, languishing under the guilt and condemnation of sin. Upon which Motives, and no other, he gave his only begotten Son to die for our sins, to be a ransom and propitiation for the sins of the world 
e 1 John 2.2. : That whosoever believeth in him, should not perish, but (through forgiveness in his Blood) have life everlasting 
f John 3.16. . But for the external impulsive efficient cause of this act of Gods, the meritorious cause thereof, that indeed is no other than our Lord JESUS CHRIST; the death and sufferings of our most blessed Lord and Saviour. For God beholding Christ, as such, and so great a sufferer for the sins of men, is thereby moved and induced to deliver those that believe in him, both from the burden of their sins, and that condemnation which legally and justly is due unto them. This testified most clearly by that holy Scripture, Be ye kind (saith the Apostle) unto one another forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you 
g Eph. ●. 32. . Where plainly the impulsive cause inclining God to pardon us our sins and trespasses, is the respect he hath unto the sufferings of our Saviour Christ Thus the Apostle tells us in another place, That we are freely justified by the grace of God, through the Redemption which is in CHRIST JESUS 
h Rom. 3.24. . Justified freely by God's grace, as by the internal impulsive cause of our justification, by which he is first moved to forgive us our sins; through the Redemption procured for us, by the death and sufferings of CHRIST JESUS, as the external moving or impulsive cause of so great a mercy.  
In this respect, the pardon and forgiveness of the sins of men, is frequently ascribed in Scripture to the Blood of Christ; as in the Institution of the Sacrament by the Lord himself, This is my Blood of the New Testament, which is shed for you, and for many, for the remission of sins 
i Matth. 26.28. . Thus the Apostle to the Romans, Whom (JESUS CHRIST) did God set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his Blood, to declare his righteousness, for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God 
k Rom. 3.25. . And thus to the Ephesians also, In whom we have redemption through his Blood, the remission of sins, according to the riches of his grace 
l Eph. 1.7. . To this effect St. Peter also, For ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as with silver and gold, but with the precious Blood of Christ, as of a Lamb without blemish, and without spot 
m 1 Pet. 1.18, 19 . And so St. john, The Blood of jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin 
n 1 John 1.7. ; and, he hath washed us from our sins in his own Blood, in another place 
o Apoc. 1.5. . Infinite other places might be here produced, in which the forgiveness of our sins is positively and expressly ascribed to the Blood of Christ, or to his death and sufferings for us, which comes all to one. But these will serve sufficiently to confirm this truth, that the main end for which Christ suffered such a shameful ignominious death, accompanied with so many scorns and torments, was thereby to atone or reconcile us to his Heavenly Father, to make us capable of the remission of our sins, through the mercy of God; and to assure us by that means of the favour of God, and our adoption to the glories of eternal life. By that one offering of himself hath he for ever perfected all them that are sanctified 
p Heb. 10.14. : Blotting out the hand-writing of Ordinances which was against us, and nailed it to his cross for ever 
q Col. 2.14. ; to the end, that being mindful of the price wherewith we were bought, and of the enemies from whom we were delivered by him, We might glorify God both in our bodies and our souls 
r 1 Cor. 6.20. , and serve the Lord in righteousness and holiness, all the days of our lives. For if the blood of Bulls and of Goats, and the ashes of an Heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctified to the purifying of the flesh, in the time of the Mosaical Ordinances: How much more shall the Blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God 
s Heb. 9.13, 14. , in the time of the Gospel? This is the constant tenor of the Word of God, touching remission of our sins by the Blood of Christ And unto this we might here add the consonant suffrages and consent of the ancient Fathers; If the addition of their Testimonies, where the authority of the Scripture is so clear and evident, might not be thought a thing unnecessary. Suffice it that all of them, from the first to the last, ascribe the forgiveness of our sins to the death of Christ, as to the meritorious cause thereof; though unto God the Father, as the principal Agent, who challengeth to himself the power of forgiving sins, as his own peculiar and prerogative, Isai. 43.25. Peculiar to himself, as his own prerogative, in direct power essential and connatural to him; but yet communicated by him to his Son CHRIST JESUS, whilst he was conversant here on Earth, who took upon himself the power of forgiving sins 
t Matth. 9.2, 6. & 28.18. , as part of that power which was given him both in Heaven and Earth. Which as he exercised himself when he lived amongst us, so at his going hence he left it as a standing Treasury to his holy Church to be distributed and dispensed by the Ministers of it, according to the exigencies and necessities of particular persons. For this we find done by him as a matter of fact, and after challenged by the Apostles as a matter of right belonging to them and to their successors in the Ministration. First, For the matter of fact, it is plain and evident, not only by giving to St. Peter (for himself and them) the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, annexing thereunto this promise, That whatsoever he did bind on Earth, should be bound in Heaven, and whatsoever he did loose on Earth, should be loosed in Heaven 
u Matth. 16.19. ; But saying to them all expressly, Receive the Holy Ghost 
x John 20.22, 23. ; Whose sins soever ye remit, they are remitted unto them, and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained. And as it was thus given them in the way of fact, so was it after challenged by them in the way of right, St. Paul affirming in plain terms, That God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, by not imputing their trespasses unto them 
y 2 Cor. 5.19, 20. ; but that the Ministry of this reconciliation was committed unto him, and others, whom Christ had honoured with the title of his Ambassadors, and Legates here upon the Earth.  
Now as the state of man is twofold in regard of sin, so is the Ministry of reconciliation twofold also in regard of man. As he is tainted with the guilt of original sinfulness, the Sacrament of Baptism is to be applied, the Laver of Regeneration, by which a man is born again of water, and the Holy Ghost, john 3.5. As he lies under the burden of his actual sins, the Preaching of the Word is the proper Physic to work him to repentance, and newness of life, that on confession of his sins he may receive the benefit of absolution. Be it known unto you (saith St. Paul) that through this man (CHRIST JESUS) is preached unto you remission of sins; and by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses 
z Act 13.38. .  
And first for Baptism, It is not only a sign of profession and mark of difference, whereby Christian men are discerned from others which be not Christened, (as some Anabaptists falsely taught) but it is also a sign of regeneration or new birth, whereby, as by an instrument, they that receive Baptism rightly, are grafted into the Church, the promises of the forgiveness of sin, and of our adoption to be the sons of God, by the Holy Ghost, are visibly signed and sealed; Faith is confirmed, and Grace increased by virtue of Prayer unto God 
a Artic of Rel. 27. An. 1562. . This is the public Doctrine of the Church of England, delivered in the authorised Book of Articles, Anno 1562. In which, lest any should object, as Dr. Harding did against Bishop jewel, That we make Baptism to be nothing but a sign of regeneration 
b Defence of the Apol. part. 2. cap. 11. sect. 3. , and that we dare not say, as the Catholic Church teacheth according to the holy Scriptures, That, in and by Baptism, sins are fully and truly remitted, and put away: We will reply with the said most Reverend and Learned Prelate (a man who very well understood the Church's meaning) That we confess, and have ever taught that in the Sacrament of Baptism, by the death and Blood of Christ, is given remission of all manner of sins; and that not in half, or in part, or by way of imagination and fancy, but full, whole, and perfect of all together; and that if any man affirm, that Baptism giveth not full remission of sins, it is no part nor portion of our Doctrine. To the same effect also, saith judicious Hooker, Baptism is a Sacrament which God hath instituted in his Church, to the end, That they which receive the same, might thereby be incorporated into Christ, and so through his most precious merit, obtain as well that saving grace of imputation, which taketh away all former guiltiness; and also that infused divine virtue of the Holy Ghost, which giveth to the powers of the soul the first dispositions towards future newness of life 
c Hook. Eccl. Pol. l. 5. n. 59 & 67. . But because these were private men, neither of which, for aught appears, had any hand in the first setting out of the Book of Articles (which was in the reign of King Edward the Sixth) though Bishop jewel had in the second Edition, when they were reviewed and published in Queen Elizabeth's time; let us consult the Book of Homilies, made and set out by those who composed the Articles; And there we find, that by God's mercy, and the virtue of that Sacrifice which our High Priest and Saviour CHRIST JESUS the Son of God once offered for us upon the Cross, we do obtain God's grace, and remission, as well of our original sin in Baptism, as of all actual sin committed by us after Baptism, if we truly repent and turn unfeignedly unto him again 
d Homil. of Salvation, p. 2. . Which doctrine of the Church of England, as it is consonant to the Word of God in holy Scripture, so is it also most agreeable to the common and received judgement of pure Antiquity. For in the Scripture it is said expressly by St. Peter, to the sorrowful and afflicted jews, Repent and be baptised every one of you in the name of jesus Christ, for the remission of sins 
e Acts 2.38. . By Ananias unto Saul, Arise, and be baptised, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord 
f Acts 22.16. . By Paul himself, who had experimentally found the efficacy and fruit thereof in his own person, That God according to his mercy hath saved us, not by works of righteousness, which we have done, but by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost 
g Tit. 3.5. ; and finally, by St. Peter also, That Baptism doth now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience towards God) by the resurrection of jesus Christ 
h 1 Pet. 3.21. . This also was the judgement of the Ancient Writers, and that too long before the starting of the Pelagian Heresies, to which, much is ascribed by some as to the advancing of the efficacy and fruit of Baptism, by succeeding Fathers. For thus Tertullian, Quotidiè nunc aquae populos conservant, deleta morte per ablationem delictorum. Exempto scilicet reatu eximitur & poena. Ita restituetur homo Deo ad similitudinem ejus qui retro ad imaginem Dei conditus fuerat 
i Tertul. de Baptism c. 5. . Now (saith he) do the Waters daily preserve the people of God, death being destroyed and overthrown by the washing away of sins; for where the guilt is taken away, there is the punishment remitted also. St. Cyprian thus, Remissio peccatorum sive per Baptismum sive per alia Sacramenta donetur, propriè Spiritus Sancti est 
k Cypr. de Baptism. Christi. ; that is to say, that the remission of sins, whether given in Baptism, or by any other of the Sacraments, is properly to be ascribed to the Holy Ghost. The African Fathers in full Council do affirm the same, and so doth Origen also for the Alexandrians, of both which, we shall speak anon in the point of Paedo-baptism. Thus Nyssen for the Eastern Churches, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Baptism, saith he, is the expiation of our sins, the remission of our offences, the cause of our new-birth and regeneration 
l Nyss. in Orat. de Baptis. Christ. . Thus do the Fathers in the Constantinopolitan Council, profess their Faith in one Baptism (or being only once baptised) for the remission of sins. And finally, That this was the doctrine of the Church in general, before Augustine's time, who is conceived to be first that did advance the power and efficacy of Baptism to so great an height, in opposition to the Pelagian Heresies 
m V. Tombs his Book against Infant-Baptism. , appears by a byword grown before his time into frequent use; the people being used to say, when they observed a man to be too much addicted to his lusts and pleasures, Sine illum faciat quod vult, nondum enim baptizatus est 
n August. Conf. l. 1. c 11. ; i. e. Let him alone to take his pleasure, for as yet the man is not baptised. More of this we shall see anon in that which follows. Nor is this only Primitive, but good Protestant Doctrine as is most clear and evident by that of Zanchius, whom only I shall instance in, of the later Writers. Cum Minister Baptizat, etc. When the Minister baptizeth, I believe that Christ with his own hand reached, as it were, from Heaven, Filium meum sanguine suo in remissionem peccatorum aspergere, besprinkleth the Infant with his Blood to the remission of sins, by the hand of that man whom I see besprinkling him with the Waters of Baptism. So that I cannot choose but marvel how it comes to pass, that it must now be reckoned for a point of Popery, that the Sacraments are instrumental causes of our justification, or, of the remission of our sins; or that it is a point of learning, of which, neither the Scriptures, nor the Reformed Religion, have taught us any thing 
o Goodw. of Justify part. 2. c. 4. sect. 12. . So easy a thing it is to blast that with Popery, which any way doth contradict our own private fancies.  
But here before I do proceed further in this present Argument, I shall make bold to divert a little upon the ancient use of Baptismal-washing, before our Saviour Christ ordained it for an holy Sacrament; that we may see what hint our Saviour took in this Institution, who thought it no impiety to fit the ancient usages of the jews and Gentiles to the advancement of the Gospel; though now to hold conformity with the Church of Rome, in matters very pertinent to the same effect, is reckoned for the greatest Error in our Reformation.  
First for the jews, that they used very frequent washings, is most clear in Scripture. For not only the Pharisees particularly, who were a superstitious supercilious Sect, but the jews in general have this Character given them by St. Mark 
p Mark 7.3, 4. , That they eat not, except they wash their hands oft; that they washed as often as they came from market, or any public place of meeting; and that they did observe upon old Tradition, the washing of Cups, and Pots, of brazen Vessels, and of Tables. And this they did not only in the way of cleanliness, or in point of manners, to wash away the filth of their bodies when they went to eat, or to make clean their Vessels, and other Vtensiles, which they ate or drank in: But rather out of an opinion, that by those frequent washings they preserved themselves from the filth and corruption of the world; especially in their return from the streets and market places 
q Mark 7.4. , where possibly they might meet with some that were uncircumcised, or otherwise obnoxious to an ill report, by which they thought themselves defiled. And this I take to be an ancient custom of the jews, because I find it much in use amongst the Samaritans, who were in many, if not most, of their common Ceremonies, but the Apes only of the jews. Who on the same opinion of their own dear sanctity, which had so perfectly possessed their neighbours of judah, did use when they had visited any of the Nations, to sprinkle themselves with urine upon their return; and if by negligence or necessity of business they had touched any, not of their own Sect, to drench themselves overhead and ears in the next Fountain 
r Epiphan. in Panar. . The reason of which is thus delivered by Epiphanius, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. e. Because they held it for an abomination to come near a man that was of a different Religion, or persuasion from them. But this appears more plainly by that passage of St. john's Gospel, where there is mention of six water pots of stone, at the marriage-feast of Cana in Galilee, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, after the manner of the purifying of the jews 
s John 2.6. . Where by no means I can consent to Maldon●tes interpretation, who will not have these water-pots to be used at all for any Legal or Mosaical purification, Qua qui secundum legem polluti erant, mundabantur, in which they used to wash themselves who had incurred some legal pollution; but only for those Pharisaical washings, which the Pharisees used often in the midst of a feast: Which had it been the meaning of the holy Evangelist, it is like he would have rather called it, The purification of the Pharisees, than the Purifying of the jews. We also have the testimony of St. Paul himself, affirming, That the service of God under the first Tabernacle, consisted only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal Ordinances 
t Heb. 9.10. ; where we see divers washings put for part of the Legal Ceremonies. Not to run over more particulars, that washing of the hands was used as a sign of innocency, a sign of freedom from such guilt as men stood accused of, is not apparent only by those words of the Royal Psalmist, I will wash my hands in innocency, Psal. 26. But by that memorable passage in the Book of Deuteronomy, where the Elders and judges of the people, in the case of an accidental undiscovered murder, are commanded to wash their hands, and say, Our hands have not shed this blood, neither have our eyes seen it 
u Deut. 21.7. . In imitation of which custom (for the Romans had no such, for aught I have read) Pilate forsooth, must wash his hands at the death of Christ 
x Matth. 27. 2● , as if it had been an accidental (chance-medley, as we use to call it) not a studied murder.  
Next, to proceed unto the Gentiles, these Legal washings of the jews in case of pollution, were quickly taken up by the Neighbor-nations, near whom they lived, and amongst whom their ordinary business and affairs gave them correspondence; insomuch, that they had not only frequent washings to cleanse them from ordinary offences, but used them also as purgations for their greater crimes, and as preparatories to their Sacrifices and Divine solemnities. Of sprinkling the common people with this holy water we find this of the Poet, Spargere rore levi, & ramo foelicis Olivae, lustravitque viros 
y Virg. Aeneid. , that is to say, That the Priest sprinkled the bystanders with an Olive-bough, and thereby hallowed them (as it were) for the present service. Of the opinion which they had of doing away their greater crimes by the washing of water, we have the example of Orestes, who having killed his Mother, and so lost his wits, is said by Homer to have recovered his understanding again, by this kind of washing. The like did Theseus on the murder of the sons of Pallas 
z Pausan. in Attic. ; the like Apollo and Diana on the slaughter of Pytho 
a Id. in Corinthiac. , as we read in Pausanias, a learned writer of the Greeks. Tertullian hath delivered it for a general rule, Penes veteres quisquis se homicidio infecerat, purgatrice aqua se expiabat 
b Tertul. de Bapt. c. 5. , That anciently they which were guilty of homicide or wilful murder, did use to expiate the crime with a purging water; and that they also did the like in the case of Perjury. Nay, he that was returned from war, and was no otherwise involved in the blood of mankind, than according to the ordinary course of battles, did either in piety or modesty think himself unfit to deal in any civil, much less sacred matters, Donec me flumine vivo abluero 
c Virg. Aeneid. 2. , as the Poet hath it; till he had washed himself in the running waters. Of which, and of the Expiations which were conceived to be attained by means thereof, we find this in Ovid, 
O nimium faciles, qui tristia crimina caedis  
Fluminea tolli posse putatis aqua.   
In English thus. 
Too facile souls, who think such heinous matters  
May expiated be with River-waters.  Wherein, although he hit it right, as to the humour of the people in those expiations, yet he was somewhat out in the word fluminea, the waters only of the Sea serving for expiation of the greater crimes, Propter vim igneam magnopere purgationibus consentaneam 
d Alex. ab Alex. Dier. Genial. l. , as my Author hath it. For which cause questionless, the Papists in the composition of their holy water, make use of Salt, as one of the chief ingredients, that it may come more near in nature unto the water of the Sea; of which, there is enough to be seen in the Roman Rituals. Last of all in their Sacrifices and solemn service of the Gods, it is observed by Alexander ab Alexandro, In omnibus sacris sacerdotem, cum diis immolat & rem divinam facit, corporis ablutione purgari 
e Id. ibid. , That the Priest used to wash himself all over in the way of Purgation. The reason was, because that by such washings they did not only think themselves to be cleansed from sin, Sed & castimoniam praestari putant, but that chastity and purity of mind was conferred withal: And to come nearer to our business, Tertullian tells us, Sacris quibusdam per lavachrun initiari 
f Tertul. de bap: c. 5.  that unto some of their sacred offices, as to those of Isis, Mithras, and the Games of Apollo, they were consecrated or initiated by a kind of Baptism. So that our Saviour finding such a general consent both of jews and Gentles, in ascribing unto water such an expiating and cleansing power, retained it as the fittest element for the initiating of his followers in his holy Church, and the cleansing of their souls from that filth of sin, which nature and corrupt education had contracted in them. No otherwise than in the institution of the other Sacrament, he made not only use of the bread and Wine, but almost also of the accustomed formal words which were in use amongst the jews at their Paschal Supper: his heavenly wisdom so disposing of these former Rites, that he seemed rather to direct and sanctify them to his own great end, than any way to innovate in the institution.  
Having thus spoke a little of these Baptismal washings used amongst the jews (for by that name they do occur both in St. Marks Gospel and in Paul's Epistle) and of the efficacy falsely and erroneously ascribed unto them by the ancient Gentiles: We must next look upon them as an Institution of our Lord and Saviour's, and of the true effect of that institution in cleansing of ourselves from the filth of sin. Not that we give this power to water, as it is an Element, but do ascribe the same to Baptism as it is a Sacrament ordained by Christ himself to that end and purpose. And so far it is pleaded by Tertullian strongly, that if the Gentiles did ascribe so great power to water in all their Expiations and Initiations, Quanto id verius aquae praestabunt per Dei authoritatem 
g Tertul. de bap. c. 5. , How much more truly may it be made effectual to those very purposes by the authority and appointment of Almighty God? All waters in themselves were alike effectual as to the curing of Naaman's Leprosy; Abanah and Pharphar, Rivers of Damascus, as proper to that cure as the river of jordan 
h 2 King. 5.12. , had not God in the way of a present remedy, conferred that blessing upon jordan, which was not to be found in those other Rivers. It was God's blessing, not the water, which produced that Miracle, to which all other waters might have been as serviceable, if God had said the word, and disposed so of them. And so it is also in the work of regeneration, which we ascribe, not to the water, but the institution; nor to the Sacramental water of itself alone, but to the holy Spirit which is active in it, Et ipsi soli hujus efficienciae privilegium manet 
p Cypr. de baptismo Chri. , to which belongeth the prerogative in this great effect. For as the Spirit of God moving upon the waters of the great Abyss, did out of that imperfect matter produce the world; so the same Spirit moving on the waters of Baptism, doth by its mighty power produce a regenerate Creature. From hence it is, that in the setting forth of so great a work, the water and the Spirit are oft joined together, as in St. john, Except a man be born again of Water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven 
q Joh. 3.5. ; And in St. Paul, accrrding to his mercy hath he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost 
r Tit. 3.5. : And in St. john's Epistle also, There be three that bear witness on the earth, the Spirit, and the Water, and the Blood 
s 1 Joh. 5.8. . And if the Spirit go along with the Waters of Baptism (as we see them joined together in the holy Scripture) no question but it will be made effectual to the work intended, which is, the washing away of sins, whether small or great, whether Original or Actual, of what sort soever.  
For proof whereof, besides what hath been said of this Point already, let us behold the practice of the Primitive times, when the Discipline of the Church was grown so severe, that some were hardly admitted at all unto public Penance, others removed from the communion of the Church, for three, four, or seven years together, and sometimes (as the quality of the sin appeared) for the whole time of their lives. A Discipline which the Church used only towards those which had given up their names in baptism, to be visible members of that body whereof Christ was Head; and that made more unpleasing to most sort of men upon the growth and spreading of the Novatian Heresy, who mistaking the Apostles meaning, declared all those to be uncapable of mercy, who sinned after Baptism, and therefore neither would admit them unto public penance, nor otherwise restore them to the Church's peace, of whom St. Cyprian thus complaineth, Sic obstinatos esse quosdam ut dandam non putent lapsis poenitentiam 
t Cypr. l. 4. Epl 2. . And though the Orthodox party did abominate these Novatian rigours, yet were they too straitlaced towards those who fell into any public or notorious sin, after they had received the Sacrament of Regeneration, it being conceived, that after Baptism, major in sordibus delictorum reatus 
u August. Confess. l. 1. c. 11. , as it is in Augustine, the smallest sins seemed greater than indeed they were. Upon this ground, and an assurance which they had that all their sins whatever were expunged in Baptism, it was the custom of too many to defer their Baptism till the hour of their death, or till they lay so far past hope on the bed of sickness, that nothing but the stroke of death was to be expected. Thus doth the Story tell us of the Emperor Constantine, that in extremo vitae die 
x Euseb. de vita Constant. l. 4. cap. 51.52. , when he was even brought to the point of death, he was baptised in Nicomedia by the hands of Eusebius; the like of Theodosius a most pious Prince: upon these grounds St. Austin did defer his baptism a long time together, that so he might more freely enjoy those pleasures to which he was addicted in his younger years 
y Aug. Confes. 1. . On the like fear of such relapses as were censured so severely in those rigid times, he put off the baptising of Adeodatus (his own natural Son) till he came to thirteen years of age, at what time the severity of the Church began to slaken, or rather the good Father's judgement was then changed to the better, on the right understanding of the use and nature of that holy Sacrament. A custom, as ill taken up, so as much condemned; and subject to the Church's censures when occasion served; those which were so baptised and escaped from death, whom they called Clinici 
z Euseb Eccles. hist. l. 6. c 42. & , because they were baptised on the bed of sickness, being disabled by the Canons from the holy Ministry 
a Concil. Neocaesar. Can 12. . But whether censured or not censured it comes all to one, as to the point I have in hand, which was to show that in the practice and opinion of those elder times, the Sacrament of Baptism was held to be the general plaster for all manner of sins; and though sometimes deferred till the hour of death, on the occasion and mistakes before remembered, yet then most earnestly desired, ad delenda erratu illa, quae quoniam mortales erant, admiserant 
b Euseb. de vita Const. l. 4. c. 1. , as the Historian saith of the Emperor Constantine, for expiating of those sins which they had committed.  
But on the other side, as some did purposely defer it till the time of their death, out of too great a fear of the Church's censures, and a desire to enjoy the pleasures of sin yet a little longer; so others, and those the generality of the people of God, out of a greater care of their children's safety, procured it to be administered unto them in their tenderest infancy, almost as soon as they were born. And this they did on very pious and prudential considerations though there be no express command, nor positive precept for it in the holy Scripture, for when we read, that we were shapen in iniquity, and conceived in sin, Psal. 51.5. that all men are by nature the children of wrath, Ephes. 2.3. and that except a man be born again of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven, Joh. 3.5. What Parent can so far put off all natural affections, as not to bring his child to baptism (especially if there be any danger of death) as soon as all things fitting can be had in readiness for that ministration? And though there be no positive precept, nor express command for Infant-baptism in the holy Scripture, it is sufficient ground for the Church to go on, if it be proved to be an Apostolical practice; and that it is at least an Apostolical practice, there will appear sufficient evidence to any man not prepossessed with prejudice, and mispersuasions: For when we find particular mention of the baptising of whole households, as of that of Lydia, Act. 16.15. of the Gaoler vers. 33. of the same Chapter, and of Stephanus, 2 Cor. 1.16. Either we must exclude children from being part of the household, which were very absurd, or else admit them with the rest to this holy Sacrament. But because many exceptions have been made against these instances, some thinking it possible enough that those households had no children in them (as we see many families in great Towns and Cities where no Infants are;) others restraining the administration of Baptism unto such of the household, as by giving testimony of their Faith and Repentance were made capable of it; we must for further proof make use of a Rule in Law, and back that Rule of Law by a practical Maxim delivered by the Ancient Fathers: The Rule is this, That Custom is the best interpreter of a doubtful Law; and we are lessoned thereupon to cast our eyes, in all such questionable matters, unto the practice of the State in the selfsame case. Si de Interpretione legis quaeritur, imprimis inspiciendum est, quo ●ure Civitas retro in hujusmodi casibus usa fuit. Consuetudo enim optima interpretatio Legis est 
c De legib & long. Consuet. , Where we have both the Rule and the Reason too; Which Rule as it holds good in all Legal Controvesies, so there is a practical Maxim of as much validity in matters of Ecclesiastical nature, delivered by the ancient Writers. This Maxim we will take from St. Augustine's mouth, and after show how consonant it is unto the mind of the rest of the Fathers. Quod universa tenet Ecclesia, nec in Conciliis institutum, sed semper retentum est, non nisi Apostolica autoritate traditum rectissimè creditur 
d August. Cont. Donat. l. 4. c. 23. , i. e. Whatsoever the whole Church maintaineth, which hath not been ordained by authority of Councils, but been always holden, most rightly may be thought to have been delivered by Apostolical authority. To this agreeth St. Hierom also, saying, Etiamsi Scripturae autoritas non subesset, totius Orbis in hanc partem consensus instar praecepti obtineret 
e Hierom. adv. Lucifer. , That were there no authority of the Scripture for it, yet the unanimous consent of all the world were as good as a precept. So doth St. Irenaeus also, who telleth us that in doubtful cases, Oportet in antiquissimas rec●rrere Ecclesias in quibus Apostoli conversati sunt, & ab iis de praesenti quaestione sumere quod certum & re liquidum est 
f Iren. advers. haer. l. 3 c. 4. , we are to have recourse to the Eldest Churches in which some of the Apostles lived, and learn of them what is to be determined in the present question. And to this Maxim thus confirmed, not only the Romanists do submit, but even Calvin too; who telleth us he would make no scruple to admit Traditions, Si modo Ecclesiae traditionem ex certo & perpetuo sanctorum & Orthodoxorum consensu confirmaret 
g Calv. cont. Pigh. de lib. Arbit. , If Pighius could demonstrate to him, that such Traditions were derived from the certain and continual consent of Orthodox and godly men. If then, according to this Maxim, it be made apparent, that Infant-baptism hath been generally used in the Church of Christ, not being ordained in any Council, but practised in those elder Churches in which some of the Apostles lived, and since continued in the constant and perpetual usage of all godly men, we may conclude, that certainly it is of Apostolical Institution, though there occur no positive Precept for it in the Book of God.  
Which ground so laid, we will proceed unto our proofs for this general practice, taking our rise from Augustine's time, without looking lower, because his Authority is conceived to have carried the Baptism of Infants, almost without control in the following ages 
h Tombs Exam. of Marsh. p. 12. . First then for Augustine, he is positive and express herein, Infants reos esse Originalis peccati, & ideo baptizandos esse, That Infants being guilty of Original sin, are to be Baptised 
i August. Serm. 8. de Verb. Apl. c 8. , and this he calls antiquam fidei regulam, the old Rule of Faith, and saith expressly, Hoc Ecclesia semper habuit, semper tenuit, & à majorum fide recepit 
k Id. Serm. 10. de Verb. Apl. c. 2. , That the Church always held and used it, deriving in from the authority and credit of their Predecessors. St. Chrysostom a Presbyter of the church of Antioch, where St. Peter sometimes sat as Bishop, somewhat before S. Augustins' time, speaks of Infant-Baptism, as a thing generally received in the Christian Church; Hoc praedicat Ecclesia Catholica ubique diffusa, The Catholic Church (saith he) over all the world doth approve of this. Some what before him lived St. Hierom, a Presbyter of the Church of Rome, which questionless was one of the Apostolic Sees, founded both by St. Peter and St. Paul, the two great Apostles of jew and Gentile, as the Ancients say 
l Iren. adv. haeres. l. 3. c. 3. , And he is clear for Infant-Baptism. Qui parvulus est Parentis in Baptismo vinculo solvitur, etc. Children, saith he, are freed in Baptism from the sin of Adam, in the guilt whereof they were involved, but men of riper years from their own and his 
m Hieron. adv. Pelag. l. 3. in fine. . And in conclusion he resolves, Infants etiam in peccatorum remissionem baptizandos, etc. That Infants are to be baptised for the remission of sins, and not as the Pelagians taught, into hopes of Heaven, as if they had been guilty of no sin at all. A little before him flourished St. Ambrose, successor to Barnabas the Apostle in the See of Milan 
n Martyro●. Rom. in Jun. 10. , who speaking of the Pelagian Heresies, who published amongst other things, that the hurt which Adam did unto his posterity, was exemplo non transitu, rather by giving them such a bad example of disobedience, than by driving on them any natural sinfulness, doth thereupon infer, that if this were true, Evacuatio Baptismatis parvulorum 
o Ambr. lib. 10. Epl. 84. , The Baptism of Infants were no longer necessary. And in the same age, but before, flourished Gregory Nazianzen, who calling Baptism Signaculum vitae cursum ineuntibus, a Seal imprinted upon those who begin to live, requires, That children should be brought unto holy Baptism, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, lest they should wart the common grace of the Church 
p Nazianz. de Baptism. Orat. 41. . And though he afterwards advise, that the Baptism of Children should be deferred till they be three years old, that so they might be able to make answer to some Catechetical questions; yet in a case of danger he doth press it home; it being better (as he grants) that they be sanctified insensibly, they not perceiving it (by reason of their tender years) than that they should depart hence without that signature. Ascend we from the fourth to the third age of the Church, and there we find St. Cyprian the Great, Bishop of Carthage, as great a stickler for the Baptism of Infants, as any one whosoever in the times succeeding. He in an Epistle to one Fidus doth thus plead the case, Porro si etiam gravissimis delictoribus, &c 
q Cypr. Epl. 59 ad Fidum. . If, saith he, remission of sins be given to the greatest offenders, none of which, if they afterwards believe in God, are excluded from the grace of Baptism: Quanto magis prohiberi non debet infans, qui recens natus nihil peccavit, etc. How much rather should an Infant be admitted to it, who being newborn, have not sinned at all, save that they have contracted from Adam that original guilt, which followeth every man by nature; and therefore are more capable of the forgiveness of sins, than others are, Quod illis remittuntur non propria sed aliena peccata, Because it is not their own, but another's sin: Nor was this the opinion of St. Cyprian only, but the unanimous consent of Sixty and six African Bishops convened in Council, by whom it was declared (as he there relateth) That Baptism was to be ministered as well to Infants, as unto men of riper years. Before him flourished Origen, and he telleth us plainly, Ecclesiam ab Apostolis traditionem accepisse, etiam parvulis Baptismum dare 
r Origen. in Rom. c. 6. , That the Church received the Baptism of Infants from Apostolical tradition. And more than so, he showeth, That it is ministered to them in reference to original sin; which were it not to be found in Infants, and that they did not stand in need of remission of sins, Gratia Baptismi superflua videretur, the grace conferred in Baptism would be thought superfluous 
Id. in Levit. hom. 8. . And in another place, speaking of the Ceremonies of Baptism, and of the Questions and Answers which are therein used, he makes them to be matters of such antiquity, that few or none (Quis facile explicat rationem 
t Id. in Numer. homil. 5. , as his words there are) were able to assign the true reason of them. Which questionless must be understood of Infant-Baptism, or else it could be no hard matter to assign a Reason, of any Question there propounded unto men of years. And in this age I place the Author of the Questions and Answers ascribed to justin Martyr, and found amongst the rest of his works, but are none of his: Which Author, whosoever he was, speaking of this Infant-Baptism, as a thing usual in his time, and of the different estates of such Infants as died baptised, from those that departed without Baptism, resolves it thus, That the baptised receive good things at the Resurrection, which the other do not 
u justin. Mart. Queen 56. add Orthod. ; and that they are accounted worthy of the good things they receive by Baptism, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by reason of the faith of those who present them to it, their Godfathers, and Godmothers, as we call them now. In the beginning of this third Century, or the end of the second, did Tertullian write his Book of Baptism; in which, though he seem to disallow of Baptising Infants, in regard of the danger which may arise unto the Sureties, (Quid enim necesse est sponsores etiam periculo ingeri 
x Tertul. de Baptis. c. 18. ?) if either they should die before they see their undertaking performed, or the child fall into a vicious course of life; yet even his disallowance is a proof sufficient, That Infant-Baptism, in his time, was a thing in use. And I hope no man will conceive, who rightly understands what Tertullian was, that his dislike or disallowance, is to be put in balance with a Catholic custom, retained for so many ages in the Church of Christ; or if it were, not only children must be barred from the favour of Baptism, but all unmarried persons, whether Maids or Widows, Bachelors or Widowers, (for them he would have put off too in the selfsame Chapter,) unless they can give good assurance of their future continuance. But before him, about the middle of this second Century flourished Irenaeus, one who conversed with Polycarpus, and others of St. john's Disciples; and he seems very clear also for Infant-Baptism, Christus venit omnes per seipsum salvare, omnes inquam qui per ipsum renascuntur in Deum, Infants, & parvulos, & pueros 
y Irenaeus adv. haeres. l. 2. 39 . Christ, saith he, came into the world to save all by himself; even all, which by him are born again unto God, whether they be Infants, Boys, or Youths. Upon which words the Glosser makes this observation, Nomine renascentiae Dominica & Apostolica phrasi Baptismum intelligi; that is to say, that under the name of new-birth, or of being born again unto God, both our Redeemer, john 3.5. and his Apostles, and St. Paul, Tit. 3.5. understand the Sacrament of Baptism. Which note, by whomsoever made, is not alone agreeable unto holy Writ, but to the meaning and acception of most Catholic Doctors, as might be made apparent, had I place and time. And so far we are able to go in a direct line towards the very time of the Lords Apostles; and doubt not but we could have pursued it higher, had the writings of those few Worthies which went before, come uncorrupted to our hands. But this I hope will prove without further search, That Infant-Baptism hath the countenance of Apostolical Tradition, though not of any Positive precept.  
But here two Questions will arise, which require an Answer. For being that Faith in Christ hath been always reckoned for a necessary condition in them that come to be baptised; what Faith can possibly be expected at the hands of Infants? And secondly, If Baptism be so necessary, as it seems to be by most of the authorities before produced, for purging us from the corruption of original and actual sins, what is to be conceived of them who die unbaptised?  
First, For the Faith which is by some supposed to be in Infants born of Christian Parents, I can by no means yield unto it. For actual Faith they can have none, in regard they are not able to distinguish between good and evil; and though the Seeds of Faith are sown in them by Baptism, or that thereby they are prepared to receive an habit of Faith, which may be afterwards acquired by them, or infused into them; yet that they do bring with them an Habitual Faith, I can by no means understand. How then were children justified? by what faith baptised? I answer, By the faith of others. The faith of those who do present them unto Baptism, and of the Church which doth admit them, and finally of their Christian Parents, with whom the Covenant was made for themselves and theirs. St. Augustine is express for this, in more places than one. Sicut eos renasci per ministerium baptizantium, ita eos credere per corda & ora confitentium 
a August. Epl▪ 105▪ : As they are born again (saith he) by the Ministry of those who do baptise them, so they believe by the hearts and mouths of those who confess Christ for them. Again, saith he, Satis piè recteque creditur prodesse parvulo eorum fidem, à quibus consecrandus offertur 
b Id. de lib. Arbitr. l. 3.23. , That it may piously be believed, that little children are benefited by the faith of them, by whom they are offered unto Baptism. And in another place he saith, Accommodat illis, mater ecclesia aliorum pedes ut veniant, aliorum corda ut credant 
c Id. Serm. 10. de verb. Apl. ; The Church our Mother doth supply them with other men's feet, that they may come, and with other men's hearts too, that they might believe. The like saying may be also alleged (as B. jewel doth acknowledge 
d Defence of the Apol. part. 2. c. 11. ) out of St. Cyprian, jerom, and others. And to what other material purpose, if not to this, served Godfathers and Godmothers in those early days, whereof we find mention in Tertullian, and in the Quaestiones ad Orthod. ascribed to justin Martyr, as before was shown? Or who made answer to those Interrogatories proposed in Baptism, unto Infants, whereof Origen speaks, but the Sponsores or Presenters spoken of by the other two? And though St. Bernard be a Postnatus, one of later date, yet, in my mind, he gives a very special reason why it should be so; why God should graciously accept the faith of others for those tender Infants, who have none of their own. Nec enim omnipotentis justitia propriam ab his putat exigendam fidem, quos novit nullam propriam habere culpam 
e Bernard. Epl. 77. ; The justice of Almighty God (saith he) doth not think it fitting, that having committed no particular sin of their own, he should exact of them a proper and particular faith of their own; but as they were undone by another's fault, so they should be relieved by another's faith. To which effect, though not so fully, I have read somewhere I am sure in St. Jerome, but cannot well remember where, Qui peccavit in altero, credat in altero; That he which hath sinned in others, may believe by others.  
For the next point, though we maintain the necessity of Baptism, as the ordinary outward means to attain salvation; and do correct those Ministers by the Church's censures, by whose gross negligence or default (if required to do it) an Infant shall die unbaptised 
f Can. 69. of the year 1603. , Yet we conceive it not so absolutely necessary in the way to Heaven, but it is possible for a man to be saved without it. For antiquity supplied in some, the want of water, by blood, which many times was the case of Martyrs; in others, the inevitable want of Baptism, by the Holy Ghost, the earnestness of the desire, if it might have been had, supplying the defect of the outward Ceremony. Hence came the old distinction of Baptismus fluminis, Baptismus flaminis, and Baptismus sanguinis. Concerning which, the Fathers teach us this in brief 
g Field. of the Church. l. 3. c. 21. , That where men are debarred by an evitable impossibility from the outward Sacrament, Faith and the inward conversion of the heart, flying unto God in JESUS CHRIST, through the sweet motion and gracious instinct of the Holy Spirit, may be reckoned for a kind of Baptism, because thereby they obtain all that, which they so earnestly sought after in the Sacrament of Baptism, if they could have been partakers of it. And if it be so, that an ordinary degree of Faith do sometime obtain salvation without the Baptism of Water; much more may that which makes men willing to suffer death for Christ's and the Gospel's sake, and be baptised, as it were, in their dearest blood. It was not simply the want of Baptism, but the neglect and contempt thereof, which anciently in the Adulti, men of riper years, was accounted damnable. But what may then be said in the case of Infants, in whom are no such strong desires, no such sanctified motions? Shall we adjudge them with St. Augustine to eternal fire, (as some say he did) who thereby worthily got the name of Infanto-mastyx, or the scourge of Infants, as he had gloriously gained the title of Malleus Pelagianorum, The Maul or Hammer of the Pelagian Heretics? No: God forbid, that we should so restrain his most infinite mercies unto outward means. Or shall we feign a third place for them, near the skirts of Hell, as our good Masters do in the Church of Rome? We have as little ground for that in the holy Scripture: Rather than so, we may resolve, and I think with safety, that as the Faith of the Church, and of those which do present such as are baptised, is by God accepted for their own; so the desire and willingness of the same Church, and of their Godfathers, and Parents, where Baptism cannot possibly be had, is reputed theirs also. Or if not so, yet we refer them full of hope to the grace of God, in whose most rigorous constitutions and sharpest denunciations, deepest mercies are hid; and who is still the Father of mercies, though the God of justice. And so I shut up this discourse with these words of Hooker 
h Hooker Eccl. Polit. l. 5. , That for the Will of God to impart his grace to Infants without Baptism, the very circumstance of their natural birth, may serve in that case for a just Argument; whereupon it is not to be misliked, that men in a charitable presumption do gather a great likelihood of their salvation, to whom the benefit of Christian parentage being given, the rest that should follow is prevented by some such casualty, as man hath no power himself to avoid. So he, of those which are descended of a Christian stock. What may be thought of children born of unbelievers, hath been said elsewhere: And so much of the first ordinary outward means ordained by Christ for the remission of our sins, the holy Sacrament of Baptism.  
Proceed we next unto the other, which is the power of the Keys committed in the person of St. Peter to the Catholic Church, and those which by the Church's order are authorized and appointed to it: That miserable man being wrought upon unto repentance, by the power and preaching of the Word, may on confession of his sins be forgiven of God, or have the benefit of absolution from the hands of his Ministers, if their spiritual necessities do so require. For certainly there is not a more ready way to forgiveness of sins, than by sincere and sound repentance; nor any speedier means to beget repentance, than to present our sins unto us in their own deformity, by the most righteous mirror of the Word of God. For when the sinner comes to know by the Word of God, the heinousness of his misdeeds, the wrath which God conceives against him for his gross offences, together with the punishment which is due unto them according to his rigorous judgements: The thought thereof must needs affect him both with fear and horror, and make him truly sensible of his desperate state. To whom then shall he fly for succour, but to God alone, humbly confessing unto him both his sins and sorrows? How can he look to be recovered of the biting of these fiery Serpents, but by looking with the eye of faith on that brazen Serpent, which was exalted on the Cross for his Redemption? Or if he find his Conscience troubled, and his mind afflicted, and that he hath not confidence enough to draw near to God; then let him go unto the Priest, whom God hath made to be the judge between the unclean and the clean 
i Levit. 10.10. , whom God hath authorized to minister the word of comfort, to raise up them that be fallen, and support the weak, to give light to them that sit in darkness, and in the shadow of death, and to guide their feet in the way of peace. This is the Method to be used, the course to be pursued by those who do desire to profit in the School of repentance. And about this, as to the main and substance of it, there is but little difference amongst knowing men. For that Repentance is a necessary means required for the remission of sins, committed after Baptism, the Ancients and the Moderns do agree in one. The Fathers used to call it secundam tabulam post naufragium, the second Table after Spiritual shipwreck; on which, all those who had made shipwreck of the Faith and a good conscience used to lay hold (after they had foregone the benefit received in Baptism) to keep them up from sinking in the depth of despair, from being overwhelmed in the bottomless Ocean of sin and judgement. The Moderns set as high an estimate upon it, if they go not higher: For Calvin placeth in repentance and forgiveness of sins the sum and substance of the Gospel; Non abs re summa Evangelii statuitur in poenitentia & remissione peccatorum 
k Calvin. Instit. l. 3. c 3. n. 1. . And Beza maketh it a necessary preparation, ad perendum & recipienduns Christi beneficium, for seeking and obtaining of those benefits which we have by Christ 
l Bez. Epl. 20. . The like doth Zanchius in his Book De Relig. Cap. 18. Thes. 1. And it is generally agreed on also, That confession of our sins must be made to God, to whom alone belongs the proper and original power of forgiving sins; and who alone is able to renew those heavenly characters of divine graces in our souls, which had been formerly defaced by the continual batteries and assaults of sin. If we confess our sins, saith the Apostle▪ he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness 
m 1 Joh. 1.9 Vers. 8, 10. . But if we say, we have not sinned, we both deceive ourselves, and make God a liar. Upon which words there cannot be a better gloss than that of Ambrose. Considering (saith he) that there is no man free from the guilt of sin, Negate hoc sacrilegum 
n Ambros. in Psal. 118. ult. , it was an high degree of sacrilege to affirm the contrary; that being one of the Prerogatives of Almighty God, and far above the common law of nature? But on the other side, Remedium confiteri, It is, ●aith he, a present remedy to confess the same; all manner of diseases being then most dangerous, when they are hid from the Physician. And it is generally agreed on by all parties too, according to the holy Scripture, that none but God hath proper and original power of forgiving sins, (for who can so forgive sins, but God alone? said the Pharisees rightly, Luke 5.21.) and that it appertains unto him alone to create in us a clean heart, and renew a right spirit within us, Psal. 5●. 10. Nor do I find it much disputed amongst moderate men, but that satisfaction unto men for the wrong sustained, and to the Church for public scandals, hath always been accounted a concomitant of sincere repentance. The old rule holds unquestionably true in the present times; and, non dimittitur peccatum nisi restituatur ablatum, that sin is never fully pardoned, till the party wronged have satisfaction, either in fact or in the reality of our intentions, is a good piece of Protestant doctrine for aught I can tell. And as for satisfaction to the Church in the case of scandal, St. Augustine doth require it in his Encheiridion, Vt fuit etiam satis ecclesiae in qua remittuntur peccata 
o August. Enchei●id. c. 65. , That the Church have also satisfaction in which sins are pardoned. He must be very ignorant in all Ancient writers, who makes doubt of this, and not much conversant in the writings of the late Divines, who knows not how this satisfaction is insisted on by the strictest of our Reformators. Nay, I will go a little further, and say according to the Scriptures, and the Primitive Fathers, That satisfaction also must be given to God. Not satisfaction of condignity as the Schoolmen call it 
p Vasquez in 3. part. Tho. Tom. 4. , which is a just and equal compensation for the sin committed; for so Christ only satisfied for the sins of men; but satisfaction of congruity and impetration, by which God is incited on the part of man, by his contrition, and humiliation, and other penitential actions, to free him from the punishment which he hath deserved. The Sacrifice of God is a broken spirit, an humble and a contrite heart, he will not despise 
q Psal 51.17. . With which, and such like sacrifices is the Lord well pleased 
r Heb. 13.16. ; better than with a Bullock which hath horns and hoofs 
s Psal. 69.31. . And in this sense, (not in relation unto temporal punishments, remaining after the remission of the guilt itself, as the Papists use it) we are to understand the word in the Ancient Fathers; as Per delictorum poenitentiam Deo satisfacere, in Tertullian, Lib. de poenit. Cap. 5. Precibus & operibus suis Deo patri misericordi satisfacere, in St. Cyprian. Epist. 10. Per poenitentiae dolorem, humilitatis gemitum, cordis contriti sacrificium co-operantibus eleemosynis, in St. Ambrose.  
But the main matter in dispute, (for we will not trouble ourselves further about this particular) is, Touching the confession of our sins to men, and the authority of Sacerdotal Absolution: In the first of which we differ from the Church of Rome; and in the other, from the Grandees of the Puritan faction.  
First, For confession to be made to the Priest or Minister, it is agreeable both to the doctrine and intent of the Church of England, though not so much in practice as it ought to be. For in an Exhortation before the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, the Priest as Minister is required to say unto the People 
t Second Exhortation before the Communion. , That if there be any of them which otherwise cannot quiet his own conscience by the means aforesaid, but requireth further comfort or counsel, then let him come to me (the Parish Minister) or some other discreet and learned Minister of God's Word, and open his grief, that he may receive such ghostly counsel, advice, and comfort, as his conscience may be relieved; and that by the ministry of God's Word he may receive comfort, and the benefit of absolution, to the quieting of his conscience, and the avoiding of all scruple and doubtfulness. So also in the form of Visitation of the sick, the infirm person is required to make a special confession (to the Minister) if he feel his conscience troubled with any weighty matter; after which confession, the Priest shall absolve him in this sort 
u Form of visitation of the sick. . But because men might be unwilling to make such confession, for fear their secret sins should be brought to light, both to their danger and disgrace; in case some obligation lay not on the Priest or Minister, for his concealing of the same; the Church hath taken order for their security: For in her Ecclesiastical Constitutions she hath thus ordained▪ That if any man confess his secret and hidden sins to the Minister, for the unburthening of his conscience, and to receive spiritual consolation, and ease of mind from him; the said Minister shall not at any time reveal and make known, to any person whatsoever, any crime or offence so committed to his trust and secrecy (except they be such crimes as by the Laws of this Land, his own life may be called into question for concealing the same) under pain of irregularity 
x Canon 113. of the year 1603. . And poena irregularitatis, as the Canonists tell us, not only doth deprive a man of all his spiritual promotions for the present time, but makes him utterly uncapable of any for the time to come; and therefore is the greatest penalty, except degradation from his Priesthood, which possibly a Clergyman can be subject to. And finally, because good Laws are nothing worth, unless some care be taken for their execution, it was made one of the inquiries in the Book of Articles established in the Convocation of the year 1640. for a perpetual rule and standard in all Episcopal and Archidiaconal Visitations 
y Canon 9 of the year 1640. , and proposed thus to the Churchwardens, viz. Have you ever heard that your said Priest or Minister hath revealed and made known at any time to any person whatsoever, any crime or offence committed to his trust and secrecy, either in extremity of sickness, or in any other case whatsoever (except they be such crimes as by the Laws of this Land, etc.) declare the name of the Offender, when and by whom you heard the same 
z Article of Visit. c. 2. n. 25. . In which we see, this Church allows of one Key only to unlock Confession, and that the Gallican Church doth allow of also. For in the Readmission of the Jesuits into the University of Paris, it was especially conditioned and provided for, amongst other things, That if they heard of any attempt or conspiracy against the King, or his Realm, or any matter of treason in Confession, they (and all other Clergymen on the like occasions) should reveal the same unto the Magistrate 
a Contin of the Fr. hist. p. 30. . But to proceed, As is the purpose of the Church, such also is the judgement of those learned men which are most eminent therein, both for parts and piety, especially for their averseness from all Popish fancies.  
First, Bishop jewel thus for one, Abuses and errors being removed, and specially the Priest being learned, we mislike no manner of Confession, whether it be private or public. For as we think it not unlawful to make open Confession before many, so we think it not unlawful (abuses always excepted) to make the like confession in private, either before a few, or before one alone 
b Defence of the Apol. part. 2. c. 7. sect 2.. . The like saith Bishop Morton in his Appeal, It is not questioned between us whether it be convenient for a man burdened with sin, to lay open his conscience in private unto the Minister of God, and to seek at his hands, both counsel of instruction, and the comfort of God's pardon: But whether there be, as from Christ's institution, such an absolute necessity of this private confession, both for all sorts of men, and every Ordinance and particular sin, so as without it there is no pardon and remission to be hoped for from God 
c Mortons' Appeal. l. 2. c. 14. . Bishop Overal put it into his Inquiries amongst the Articles of his Episcopal Visitation, Anno 1619. Whether the Minister did his duty in exhorting people to confession, according to the order of the Common-Prayer Book; or had revealed any thing so made known unto him, contrary to the 113 Canon, that so he might be punished accordingly 
d See the whole Article in Montag. Gag. c. 12. . And finally, thus Bishop Usher, the now Primate of Armagh, Be it therefore known, that no kind of confession, either public or private, is disallowed by us, which is any ways requisite for the due execution of the ancient power of the Keys, which Christ bestowed upon his Church. The thing which we reject is, that new Pick-lock of Sacramental Confession, obtruded upon men's consciences as a matter necessary to salvation 
e Answer to the Jesuits Challenge. c. : Others as eminent as they, might be here produced: But I content myself with these, because that even in the opinion of those very men who have cast scandals upon those others, as inclined to Popery, they are not chargeable with any correspondence with the Church of Rome. Nor shall I show, how consonant this doctrine is to the Ancient Fathers, who require this confession of us; nor of the Lutheran Churches who do still retain it, as appears plainly by the Augustane confession, saying, Nam & nos confessionem retinemus 
f Confess. Aug. cap. de Conf.  etc. and by the Testimony of Gerrardus, and other of their learned Writers 
g Gerrard. Lo. Com. Tom 3. de poenit.  Only I shall add here what Bellarmine hath affirmed of Calvin, because his judgement, I am sure, will be worth the having, Admittit etiam Calvinus privatam confessionem coram Pastore, quando quis ita angitur & afflictatur, peccatorum sensu, ut se explicare nisi alieno adjutorio nequeat 
h Bellarm. . Calvin (saith he) admits of private confession before a Minister, when a man is so perplexed and troubled in his mind, that he cannot extricate himself no otherwise out of these anxieties.  
What then? Is there no difference in this point between Rome and us? Assuredly, much every way, especially as to the necessity, and particularity: For those of Rome impose an absolute necessity of this Sacramental Confession, as they call it, and that De jure divino, by virtue of some positive, and direct command even from Christ himself; and that too of all sins, and with all the circumstances, which is a tyranny and torture to the souls of men. But the Protestants (saith Bishop Morton) acknowledge the use of it with these two restrictions: The first, That it be free in regard of Conscience; the second, That it be possible in regard of performance 
i Mort. App. l. 2. c. 14. . And Bellarmine informs of Calvin also, that he puts these limitations upon Confession, Ut libera sit, nec ab omnibus exigatur, nec necessario de omnibus 
k Bellar. ut supra. ; that is to say, That it be left at liberty, and neither exacted of all men, nor the enumeration of all particular sins required of them. First then, the Papists make it absolutely necessary to a man's salvation, and that too by Divine precept. Without it there is no way to Heaven, saith P. Lombard 
l P. Lomb. Sent. l. 4. dist. 17. . Pope Innocent the third denied Christian burial unto such as die without Confession 
m Innocent. in Concil. Later. c. 21. . And Hugo in his Book De potestate Ecclesiae, is bold to say, That whosoever cometh to the Communion unconfessed, be he never so repentant and sorry for his sins, doth without doubt receive it to his condemnation 
n Hugo de pot. Eccles.  How so? for that we will inquire of the Council of Trent, where we shall find, Ad salutem necessariam esse jure divino, That it is necessary to salvation by the Law of God 
o Concil. Trid. Sess. 14. c. 5. ; one of the Sacraments of the New Testament, and therefore not to be omitted upon any terms. And yet for all their great brags of the Ius Divinum of Sacramental or Auricular Confession, call it which you will, though they have ransacked many Texts of Scripture to find it out, it hath been hitherto but to little purpose. Some build it on those words in St. Matthews Gospel, where he speaks of those that were baptised by John in Jordan, confessing their sins, Matth. 3.6. But, what saith Maldonate to this? Quis unquam Catholicus tam indoctus fuit ut ex hoc loco Confessionis probaret Sacramentum 
p Maldonat. in Matth. 3. : Was ever Catholic so unlearned, as to go about to prove Sacramental Confession from that Text? Some hope to find it in those words of our Saviour Christ, Whose sins ye remit, they are remitted, etc. john 20.23. But Vasquez saith, that of all those who have undertaken it, Vix invenies qui efficaciter inde deducat, You shall hardly meet with any that have effectually deduced a good proof from thence 
q Vasq. Tom 4. Qu. 90 Art. 1. . Others presume as much on that place of the Acts, where it is said, That many which believed, came and confessed, and showed their deeds, Acts 19.18. But this, says Cajetan, was a public Confession, and in generals only, sed non confessio Sacramentalis 
r Cajetan in Acts 19.18. , Not such a private and particular one as is now required; not such a Sacramental one as is now defended. But we might well have saved this particular search, it being ingenuously confessed by Michael de Palacios, a Spanish Writer, That notwithstanding all their pains, to found it on some Text of Scripture, they are so far from being agreed amongst themselves 
s Palacios in Sent. l. 4. dist. 17. , that it is much to be admired, Quanta sit de hac re concertatio, What contention there is raised about it, and how badly they agree with one another. And if they have no better ground for the main foundation, how little hopes may we conceive of finding any good in their superstructures? And yet upon no better grounds do they exact a most unreasonable particularity of all men's affairs, to be delivered to them in confession; requiring of all persons, being of age, a private and distinct confession of all and every known mortal sin, open and secret, of outward deed, and inward consent, together with all circumstances thereof, though obscene and odrous, not fit to be communicated to a modest ear; and that too once a year, at least, if they do not oftener. For this we need not go much further than the Council of Trent, where we shall find, Oportere à poenitentibus omnia peccata mortalia, quorum post diligentem sui discussionem conscientiam habent, in confession recenseri, etiamsi occultissima sunt, & tantum adversus duo ultima Decalogi mandata (remember that they divide the last Commandment into two) commissa, &c 
t Concil. Trid. Sess. 4. cap 5. ca 4, 7. . Which how impossible it is to do, should one go about it, what an intanglement it may prove unto the conscience of a penitent sinner, and what a temptation also to the Priest himself, to be acquainted with particulars so unchaste and lustful, I leave to any sober Christian to determine of, who shall find more hereof in Alvares Pelagius de Planctu Ecclesiae, L. 2. Art. 2, 3, 27, 73, 83. and Agrippa de Vanitate Scientiarum, cap. 64. Writers of their own, than I think fitting at this time they should hear from me, who do not love to rake in such filthy puddles. So then, the business of Confession doth stand thus between us, That we conceive it to be free, whereas those of Rome will have it obligatory; we, that it is juris positivi only, but they juris divini; we, that it is a matter of conveniency, and they of absolute necessity. And then for the performance of it, they do exact a punctual enumeration of all sins, both of commission and omission, together with all the accidents and circumstances thereunto belonging; which we conceive in all cases to be impossible, in some not expedient, and in no case at all required by the Word of God.  
Now as we disagree with those of the Church of Rome, about the nature and necessity of private confession, so have we no less differences with the Grandees of the Puritan faction, about the efficacy and power of Sacerdotal Absolution, which they which speak most largely of it, make declarative only, others not so much; whereas the Church hath taught us, that it is authoritative and judicial too. Authoritative, not by a proper, natural, and original power, for so the absolving of a sinner appertains unto God alone; but by a delegated and derived power, communicated to the Priest in that clause of their Commission, Whose sins soever ye remit, they are remitted; and whose sins soever ye retain, they are retained, john 20.23. Which proves the Priest to have a power of remitting sins, and that in as express and ample manner, as he can receive it. But though it be a delegated, Ministerial power, yet doth not the descent thereof from Almighty God, prove it to be the less judicial: Then Judges, and other Ministers of Justice sitting on the Bench, may be said to exercise a judicial power on the lives and fortunes of the Subjects; because they do it by virtue of the King's Commission, not out of any Sovereign power which they can challenge to themselves in their several circuits. Now that the Priests or Ministers of the Church of England, are vested with as much power in forgiving sins, as Christ committed to his Church, and the Church to them, the formal words, Whose sins soever ye remit, they are remitted, etc. which are still used in Ordinations, do expressly signify. Which though some of the Grandees of the Puritan faction have pleased to call Papisticum ritum, an old Popish ceremony 
u Travers de Discipl. Eccl. p. 53.  foolishly taken up by them, continued with small judgement by our first Reformers, & minore adhuc in ecclesia nostra retentus, and with far less retained by the present Church; yet we shall rather play the fools with the Primitive Christians, than learn wit of them. And for the exercise of this power, we have this form thereof laid down in the Public Liturgy; where, on the hearing of the sick man's confession, the Priest is to absolve him with these formal words 
x In the Visitation of the sick. , viz. Our Lord jesus Christ, who hath left power unto his Church to absolve all sinners, which truly repent and believe in him, of his great mercy forgive thee thine offences: And by his authority committed unto me, I absolve thee from all thy sins, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, Amen. In which we find, that the Sacerdotal power of forgiving sins, is a derived or delegated Ministerial power, a power committed to his Ministers by our Lord and Saviour; but that it is judicial also, not Declarative only. It is not said, That I do signify or declare, that thou art absolved, which any man may do as well as the Priest himself; but I do actually absolve thee of all thy sins, which no mortal man can but he. In this the Priest hath the pre-eminence of the greatest Potentate. And in this sense it is, that St. chrysostom saith, Deus ipse subjecit caput Imperatoris manui Sacerdotis 
y Chrysost. de Esaiae Verb. Homil. 5. , i.e. That God himself hath put the head of the Prince under the hand of the Priest: For as no man whatsoever, although he use the same words which the Minister doth, can consecrate the Elements of Bread and Wine into the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ, because he wants the power of Order, which should enable him unto it; so no man not in Priestly order can absolve from sin, though he may comfort with good words an afflicted Conscience, or though he use the same words which are pronounced by the Minister in absolution. The reason is, because he wants the power of order, to which the promise is annexed by our Saviour Christ, which makes the sentence of the Priest to be so judicial; which when the penitent doth hear from the mouth of the Minister, he need not doubt in foro conscientiae, but that his sins be as verily forgiven on Earth, as if he had heard Christ himself in foro judicii, pronouncing them with his own mouth to be forgiven in Heaven: According to the promise made unto St. Peter (or the Church in him) when he delivered him the Keys; that whatsoever he did loose on Earth, should be loosed in Heaven 
z Matth 6.19. . And so we are to understand St. Chrysostom's words, judex sedet in terris, dominus sequitur servum 
a Chrysost. de verb. Isai. Hom. 5. . The Judge remains upon the Earth, the Lord followeth the servant. His meaning is, That what the servant doth here upon the Earth, according to his Master's will, the same the Lord himself will confirm and ratify. To which effect, it is affirmed by others of the Ancient Writers, but in clearer words, That the judgement of man goeth before the judgement of God. The Priest is then a judge to pronounce the sentence, and not a Crier only (as some say) to proclaim what the Judge pronounceth; and as a Judge doth actually absolve or condemn the sinner, by the same power of pardoning or retaining sins which he had from Christ, or which Christ executes by him as his lawful deputy. For as Kings are said to minister Justice to their Subjects, though they do it not in their own persons, but by a power devolved on subordinate Officers; and as Christ himself may properly be said to have fed the multitudes, though he gave the loaves only unto his Disciples, and his Disciples to the multitudes 
b Matth. 14.19. : So he may also be affirmed to absolve the penitent, although he do it by the mouth of the Priests or Ministers; it being his act 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and theirs but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, originally his, and ministerially theirs, the same power in both. And this may further be made good by that form of Speech, used by our Saviour in the delegation of this power unto his Apostles, and by them to his Ministers in all ages since, being the very same with that which he himself hath given us in the Pater noster. In his Commission it is thus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, whose sins soever ye remit, john 20.23. And in the Lord's Prayer it is thus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and forgive us our sins, Luke 11.4. The same word used in the original for the one, and the other. And if it be a Solecism to say, as no doubt it is, That we desire no more of God in that clause of the Prayer, than that he would signify or declare that our sins are pardoned: The Solecism must be as great (for aught I can see) to say, That they are only signified or declared to be pardoned by the mouth of the Minister.  
Now that this is the meaning and intent of the Church of England, some of our Romish adversaries do not stick to grant, though others to calumniate this most Orthodox Church have given out the contrary. For one of their great Controversors hath declared in print, that it is the doctrine of some of the Protestants, That Priests have power not only to pronounce the remission of sins, but to give it also; And that this seemeth to be the doctrine of the Communion Book, in the Visitation of the sick, where the Priest saith, And by his authority committed unto me, I absolve thee from all thy sins, etc. 
c Ap. Montag. Answer to the Gogger. c. 11. . And therefore when a foulmouthed jesuit had been pleased to charge us with denying power unto the Priests of forgiving sins; Bishop Usher telleth him to his face, That he doth us wrong 
d Answer to the Jusuites challenge, p. 109. , and proves it by the very formal words in our Ordination, Whose sins soever ye remit they are remitted, and whose sins soever ye retain they are retained. But no man can say more to this, than hath been said already by Bishop Morton, now Lord Bishop of Durham, The power of absolution (saith that learned Prelate) whether it be general or particular, whether in public or in private, is professed in our Church; where both in our Public Service is proclaimed Pardon and Absolution upon all Penitents; and a particular applying of particular Absolution unto Penitents by the Office of the Ministry. And greater power than this, hath no man received from God 
e B. Morions Appeal, p 270. . And this hath also been acknowledged by the Leaders of the Puritan faction, who in their Petition to King james at his first coming to this Crown, excepted against the very name of Absolution 
f Answer of Oxon to the Petition. , (as being a Forinsecal and juridical word▪ importing more, surely, than a Declaration) which they desired to have corrected. And thereupon it was propounded in the Conference at Hampton Court, That to the word Absolution in the Rubric following the general Confession, these words, Remission of sins, might be added for Explanations sake 
g Conference at Hampton-Court, p. 14, 88 . And though Dr. Raynolds, one of the Four Proctors for the said Petitioners, in the foresaid Conference, may be conceived to have been of the same opinion with these of the aggrieved sort, whom he did appear for; yet he was so well satisfied in the power and nature of Sacerdotal Absolution, that he did earnestly desire it at the time of his death, humbly received it at the hands of Dr. Holland, the King's Professor in Divinity in the University of Oxon, for the time then being 
h See Practice of Piety in fine. ; and when he was not able to express his joy and thankfulness in the way of speech, did most affectionately kiss the hand that gave it. But what need more be said for manifesting this judicial power in the remitting of sins, than what is exercised and determined by the Church in the other branch of this Authority, in retaining sins? By which, impenitent sinners are solemnly and judicially cut off from the sacred Body of the Church, and utterly excluded from the company and Communion of the rest of the faithful. Of which, the Church hath thus resolved in her public Articles, viz. That person which by open denunciation of the Church, is rightly cut off from the unity of the Church, and Excommunicate, aught to be taken of the whole multitude of the faithful, as an Heathen and Publican, until be be openly reconciled by penance, and received into the Church by a judge, that hath authority thereunto 
i Article of Religion 33. An. 1562.  Where clearly we have found a judicial power, and a judge to exercise the same; and that not only in the point of retaining sins, in case of excommunication, but also in reconciling of the penitent, in remitting sins, in the way of ordinary absolution. Which whether it be given in Foro poenitentiae, or in Foro Conscientiae, either in private on the confession of the party, or publicly for satisfaction of the Congregation, doth make no difference in this point; which only doth consist in the proof of this, That the Priests or Ministers of the Gospel, lawfully ordained, have under Christ a power of forgiving sins: Which comfortable doctrine of the remission of sins, by God's great mercy at all times, and the Church's Ministry at some times (as occasion is) is the whole subject of this branch of the present Article. Proceed we next to those great benefits which we reap thereby, The Resurrection of the Body, and the Life Everlasting.    

ARTICLE XI. Of the Eleventh Article OF THE CREED, Ascribed to St. JUDAS, the Brother of JAMES. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. (i. e.) Carnis Resurrectionem. (i. e.) The Resurrection of the Body.  

CHAP. VII. Of the Resurrection of the Body, and the Proofs thereof. The Objections against it answered. Touching the circumstances, and manner of it. The History, and grounds of the Millenarians.  
WE are now come unto that Article of the Christian Faith, which hath received most opposition, both at home and abroad: Abroad amongst the Gentiles of the Primitive times, who used all their wit and learning to cry down this Doctrine; at home, within the pale of the Church itself, by some who had the name of Christians, but did adulterate the prime Articles of Christian belief by their wicked Heresies.  
First, for the Gentiles, it was a thing much quarrelled and opposed amongst them, that Christ himself should be affirmed to have risen again; insomuch, that St. Paul was counted mad by Festus 
a Acts 26.24. , and but a babbler at the best by the great wits of Athens 
b Acts 17.18. , for venturing to Preach before them of JESUS and the Resurrection, i.e. of jesus and his resurrection, for of that only he did speak, when they so judged of him; but of this quarrel they grew soon weary, and so gave it off. For being it was a matter of fact, confirmed at the first by so many witnesses who had seen him and converted with him after his raising from the dead, and thereupon received in the Church with such unanimity, that the faithful rather chose to lay down their lives than to alter their Belief in that particular, the world became the sooner satisfied in the truth thereof. But for the Resurrection of the dead which was grounded on it, and that his Resurrection was of so great efficacy, as that by virtue of it all the dead should rise, which had deceased from the beginning of the world to the end thereof, that they accounted such a monstrous and ridiculous paradox, as could not find admittance amongst men of reason. For this it was which was so scoffed at by Cecilius in that witty Dialogue 
c Minut. Felix in Octavio. ; Release ferunt post mortem, post favillas, they give it out (saith he) that they shall live again after death, and that they shall resume those very bodies which now they have, though burnt to ashes, or devoured by wild beasts, or howsoever putrified and brought to nothing. Putes eos jam revixisse. And this, saith he, they speak with so great a confidence, as if they were already raised from the dust of the grave, and spoke as of a matter past, not of things to come. And it did stomach them the worse, in that the Christians did not only promise a Resurrection and new life to the bodies of men, which all Philosophers and men of ordinary sense knew to be subject to corruption; but threaten and foretell of the destruction of the Heavenly Bodies, the Sun, the Moon, and all the glorious Lights in the starry Firmament, which most Philosophers did hold to be incorruptible, as the same Cecilius doth object in the aforesaid Dialogue. That Christ was raised from the dead, besides the many witnesses which gave credit to it, the Gentiles could not well deny (especially as to the possibility of such a thing) without calling some of their own gods in question. For not only the deity of Romulus did depend on the bare testimony of one Proculus, who made Oath in the Senate, that he had seen him ascend up into heaven, augustiore forma quam fuisset 
d Florus Hist. Rom. l. 1. , in a more glorious shape than before he had: but that of Drusilla, and Augustus, and Tiberius Caesar, which were all Roman gods of the last Edition 
e Seneca in Apocolocyntho. , must fall unto the ground also for lack of evidence, if either it were impossible for a dead man to be raised to life again, or taken up into the Heavens, as our Saviour was. But that from this particular instance (supposing it for true, as it might be possibly) they should infer a general Doctrine, that all the dead should rise again at the Day of Judgement, this would not sink into their heads, unless it might be made apparent, as they thought it could not, that any of that sect had been raised again, to confirm all the rest in that opinion. Without some such Protesilaus 
f Cecil. in Min. Fel.  no credit to be given to the resurrection, preach it they that would. It seems the Gentiles in this point were like the rich man mentioned in our Saviour's Parable 
g Luk. 18.30. , Except one rise up from the dead they will not believe. It was not Moses and the Prophets, nor Christ and his Apostles that could do the deed.  
Leaving these therefore for a while, and keeping those who did assume the name of Christians, and yet denied this Article of the Christian Faith unto the close of this discourse; Let us for our parts rest ourselves on the Word of God, and see what Moses and the Prophets, what CHRIST and his Apostles have delivered to us in affirmation of this Doctrine. For Moses first, it is the general opinion of most learned men, that he was the Author of the Book of job 
h V. Bellar. de Script. Eccl. , and that he wrote it purposely for a Cordial to the house of Israel, whom he found very apt to despair of God's mercies towards them, and easily out of comfort in all times of trouble; Which granted, we shall have from Moses a most ample testimony, where he reports these words of that Mirror of patience, I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth 
i Job 19.25 etc. ; 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. St. Hierom notes upon these words, that no man since Christ's time did ever speak so clearly of Christ's resurrection and his own, as job doth here before Christ's coming, Nullum tam apertè post Christum, quam ipse hic ante Christum, de Christi resurrectione loquitur, & sua 
k Hieron. Praefat. in lib. Job. , as the Father hath it. And on the same, a Reverend Father of our own makes this gloss or descant: It is affirmed, saith he, by job, that his Redeemer liveth, and shall rise again; which is as much as to say, He is the resurrection and the life 
l Joh. 11.25.  (St. john could say no more.) It is his hope; He is by it regenerate to a lively hope 
m 1 Pet. 1.3. , St. Peter could say no more than that. He enters into such particulars, this flesh, and these eyes 
n 1 Cor. 15.53. , which is as much as was or could be said by St. Paul himself. There is not in all the Old, there is not in all the New Testament a more pregnant and direct proof for the resurrection 
o B. Andrews of the Resur. Ser. 5. . St. Hierom as we saw before was of this opinion. St. Gregory comes not much behind, who on these words of job, gives us this short Paraphrase, Victurum me certa fide credo, libera voce profiteor, quia Redemptor mens resurget qui inter impiorum manus occubuit 
p Gregor. M. Moral. in Job. ; that is to say, with a sure Faith I do believe (it was it seems a part of his Creed) and with as great freedom I profess (he both believed in his heart, and confessed with his mouth) that I shall rise again at the last day; for as much as my Redeemer shall assuredly rise, who is to be done to death by ungodly men. And this is further to be noted in this Text of Scripture, that we no sooner hear of a Creator in Moses, than of a Redeemer in job; no sooner of the death of mankind in Adam, but of their restoring to life in Christ. And more than so, that though Moses who wrote this was a jew, yet job who spoke it was a Gentile (not of the seed of jacob, though perhaps of Abraham's) to show, that both the jews and Gentiles (as well the Gentiles as the jews) were to have their share in the resurrection of Christ jesus, and therefore in due time to expect their own. I know that the Socinians, Anabaptists, and some other Sectaries, who are no very good friends to the resurrection, do otherwise interpret these words of job, and will not have them meant of his resurrection, but of his restitution to his former glories. But for my part I must profess, that if the Greek Catena, and the authority of the Latin Fathers, and the consent of all the Orthodox and learned Writers of these times, were to be laid aside as incompetent judges; I am not able to discern any thing from the Text or Context, that the Holy Ghost intended them any other ways▪ than to set forth jobs constant faith in the resurrection, the knowledge that he had of his Redemption from the jaws of death.  
From Moses pass we to the Prophets, to the Psalmist first, Thou turnest man unto destruction, and sayest, Return ye children of men, or come again ye children of men, as the old Translation 
q Psa. 90.3. : Thou turnest men unto destruction, there we have their death; he calls them to return again, there is there resurrection. And this appears yet further by the following words, Thou carriest them away as with a flood, they are as a sleep 
r Ver. ●. ; and if they be but as a sleep, they shall be wakened in due time, at the sounding of the last Trump, without all peradventure. I know indeed this Psalm doth bear the Title of the Prayer of Moses, but whether made by him, or by David, or some other in his name, is not yet resolved: It is sufficient to this purpose that it passeth amongst David's Psalms, as a distinct and separate body from the works of Moses.  
On forwards to Isaiah, the Evangelical Prophet, who seems to look on Christ as if gone before him, Thy dead men (saith he) shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise: Awake and sing ye that dwell in dust, for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead 
s Isa. 26.19. . And parallel to this in another place, When ye be old your heart shall rejoice, and your bones shall flourish like herbs; and then the hand of the Lord shall be known towards his Servants, and his indignation towards his Enemies 
t Id. 66.14. . In both these Texts we find a Resurrection of the dead, effected by the raising of the body of Christ, and in some part with it; a resurrection like to that of men which do wake from sleep; like that of herbs, which though they creep into the earth in the time of Winter, shall again re-flourish in the Spring. And in the last we have not only a pure evidence for a resurrection, but for the Day of judgement, which shall follow on it: wherein the righteous Judge shall distribute his rewards and punishments, his hand of mercy towards his Servants, but wrath and indignation upon all his Enemies. St. Hierom so interpreteth the Prophet's meaning, and parallels this last place with another of the Prophet Daniel, in which it is affirmed expressly, that they which sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt 
u Dan. 12.2. : Thereupon he doth thus infer, Omnes igitur Martyrs & sancti viri qui pro Christo fuderunt sanguinem, & quorum tota vita fuit Martyrium, resurgent & evigilabunt, atque laudabunt Deum Creatorem suum qui nunc habitant in pulvere, de quibus in Daniele scriptum est 
t Hieron. in Isa. 26. , etc. Add to this rank of Proofs those several passages in which God calls himself the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of jacob 
u Exod. 3.6. & alibi. , and the illation made from thence by our Lord and Saviour, to prove the very point which we have in hand; Concerning the resurrection of the dead, have you not read (saith he) that which was spoken to you of God, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead but of the living 
x Mat. 22.31. . Here is authority enough, we need seek no further; Authority enough to persuade us this, that the Patriarches before the coming of our Saviour, were certain of their resurrection to eternal life, that they were well assured of this, that God would recompense their faith, and reward their piety, by making death the way only to a greater happiness. And this we find to be a truth so generally received amongst the jews, even in the most declining time of their Church and State; that none but the Sadduces, who also did deny the being of Angels, and of Spirits also, did make question of it, who for this cause are branded every where in the Gospel with this mark upon them, that they said there is no resurrection, as Mat. 22.23. Mark. 12.19 Luk. 20, 27. Act. 23.8. just as it followeth on the mention of jeroboham the son of Nebat that he made Israel to sin.  
Now to these Positive Texts of Scripture, and such as have their being and foundation only in the Old Testament, we will add such as are presented in the New; and those not barely positive and peremptory as the rest before, but such as seem to have a great measure of rationality in them, and to be logically inferred upon very sound premises. And of this kind we meet with divers in St. Paul's Epistle to the Corinthians, amongst whom many doubtful souls had called in question the resurrection of the body. To satisfy their doubts, and remove their scruples, the Apostle grounds himself on this, that CHRIST was risen. If CHRIST be risen from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead 
y 1 Cor. 13.12. ? for if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is CHRIST not risen. Considering therefore we have proved that CHRIST is risen, and that by the testimony of no fewer than five hundred brethren at one time 
z Ib. V. 6. , besides the other arguments which have been and may be further alleged to confirm that truth, it followeth by the reason of the Apostle, that there is a Resurrection of the Body also. And to this purpose that of Gregory, Quam in se oftendit in me facturus est, exemplo hic monstravit quod promisit in proemio 
a Greg. M. Mor. in Job. , That, saith the Father, which he exemplified in himself, he will make good upon me; what we find proved in his person, shall be further manifested in our own. Besides, we know that Christ is often called in St. Paul's Epistles, the head of the Church which is his Body 
b as Eph 4.23 etc. , and we with joy and gladness do acknowledge it for a certain truth. Now Chrysostom hath truly noted, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
c Crysost. in Eph. , that where the head is, there also will the body be; and if the Head be glorified, the Body will be also glorified; If therefore CHRIST our Head be risen, then shall we also be raised in due time who are his Body, or at least the Members of that Body; for ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular 
1 Cor. 12.27. , saith the same Apostle. But this must be expected in its own due time, as before I said: I● being not to be supposed that so great a work as this shall be wrought upon us either unseasonably, or out of order; Every one in his own order, saith the Text, first CHRIST, the first fruits of the resurrection, afterwards such as are Christ's at his coming 
e 1 Cor. 15 23. . Where still observe how Christ's resurrection and our own are tied by the Apostle in a string together. Eadem catena revincta est Christi resurrectio & nostra, as my Author hath it; we cannot stir one end of the chain, but the other moveth with it. This habitude or connexion between Christ and us, will help us to another Argument to confirm this Doctrine. For if we be the members of the body of Christ, we must be crucified in our members, as Christ's body was; Mortify therefore your earthly members 
g Col. 3.5. , saith St. Paul. And certainly we may conclude, That if we be crucified with Christ, we shall rise with Christ; if we do suffer with him, we shall also reign with him 
h Rom. 8.17. , and be glorified with him.  
There is another rational way of Argumentation used by the Apostle; the sum whereof in brief is this, That if there were no Resurrection of the Body, whereby we might receive the comfort of those good acts which we have done in our flesh; then should we have but small encouragement in the works of piety, especially to hazard our estates, nay, our very lives in maintenance and defence of the Holy Gospel. Why stand we then (saith he) in jeopardy all the day long 
i 1 Cor. 15.30. ? And why have I myself encountered Beasts at Ephesus, after the manner of men 
k Ibid v. 31, 32. , or suffered in my flesh that full variety of torments, that I may justly say of myself, that I die daily? And not so only, but certainly we rob ourselves of too much pleasure by the severity of our Religion, and foolishly deny to our lives those comforts, which make life valued for a blessing. For to what purpose should we weary out our souls with fasting, and our skins with sackcloth; or to what purpose do we make our knees even hard and callous, by kneeling in his holy Temple; were there no Resurrection of the Body, or no life to come? If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we were of all men the most miserable 
l Ibid. v. 19 . Rather than so, let us give way to our desires, and eat and drink, enjoy the pleasures of the world, whiles they are before us; for aught we know, we may die to morrow 
m Ibid. v. 32. , and with that death to morrow there is an end of all things. Thus might a man reason for a Resurrection in behalf of himself, and he may reason for it also on the behalf of God, whose justice cannot be declared in the sight of men, if there were no Resurrection of the flesh to express it by. To this end, we are told by the same Apostle, That we shall all appear before the judgement seat of Christ; that every man may receive according to that which he hath done in his body, whether good or evil 
n Rom. 10.10. . The strength and efficacy of which Argument, as is elsewhere noted, is briefly this. The Bodies of us men, being the servants of the soul to righteousness, or else the instruments to sin, in justice ought to be partakers of that weal, or woe, which is adjudged unto the soul; and therefore to be raised at the day of judgement; that as they sinned together, or served God together, so they may share together of reward or punishment. Which Argument, as it strongly proves the Resurrection of the Body, so it as strongly doth conclude for a Resurrection of the same Body, the same numerical body which before we had, not of a new created body, as some idly dream. For certainly it were no justice in Almighty God, if one flesh should fast and pray, and kneel, and watch, and weary out itself in the service of God, and another flesh reap that which it never laboured for. No comfort to the poor body at all, to abridge itself of so much pleasure, and be exposed to so much danger and affliction, and another strange body shall step up, and receive the reward. jobs confidence was, That he should see God with the same eyes, and none other for them 
o Job 19.27. . If they restrained themselves, as it were by Covenant with the Lord, from straying after objects of lust, and not entice him to a maid, as he saith he did 
p Id. 31.1. ; It is but justice, that they the same eyes, and none other, should be rewarded with the view of a better object. If they have been poured out like water 
q Id. 16.20. , and dropped many a tear in the sight of God; Reason and Justice both will agree to this, That the tears should be wiped from those eyes, not from a pair of new ones which did never shed any. And unto this St. Paul comes home, not speaking of the Resurrection of a Body in general, but of this body in particular. It is these eyes of job, none other, which shall see the Lord; and hoc corruptibile in St. Paul 
r 1 Cor. 15.53. , this corruptible, and none other, which must then put on corruption.  
And thus far we have gone upon positive proofs, and sought them also in the Law, and the Prophets only. Another kind of evidence may be found in Scripture, which for distinctions sake, shall be called Practical; common alike to Law and Gospel, both to jews and Christians. Of this sort was the solemn form of burial amongst the jews, the charges they were at in Spices and sweet Ointments to embalm the Bodies of their dead; and the command given both by joseph and jacob to their children, for the transporting of their bones to the Land of Canaan 
y Gen. 49.29. & 50.25. , the type and shadow of God's Kingdom in the Heavens above. All special testimonies that they did expect in the Lords good time, a Resurrection of those Bodies, so carefully, so choicely tendered, laid up in the Repository of the Grave with such cost and decency. When Mary Magdalen poured forth ointment on our Saviour's head, he approved it as a work well done; saying, She did it aforehand, to anoint his Body to the burial 
z Mark 14.8. . And to this purpose the good women mentioned by St. Luke, prepared their ointments and sweet odours 
a Luke 23.56. , intending therewithal to embalm his Body, but were therein prevented by his Resurrection 
b Id. 24.1, 2, 3. . Which as it proves sufficiently what the custom was, so our Redeemers Resurrection which so soon followed the anointing made by Mary Magdalen, shows plainly to what end it pointed. The care they took about them in their funeral rites, is evidence sufficient, if there were none else, That they commit the bodies of the dead unto the Earth, in sure and certain hope of the Resurrection 
c In the form of Burial. , according to the Language of the English Liturgy. Upon this very ground, no other, the Christians of the Primitive times did use to spare no cost to embalm their dead, but were more prodigal of sweet odours, and most precious ointments in the obsequies of the Saints departed, than the poverty of their estate could well admit of. Tertullian so affirms it, saying, Sciant Sabaei se pluris merces suas Christianis sepeliendis profligari, quam diis fumigandis 
d Tert. Apol. c. 42. . We spend, saith he, more Frankincense and Arabian Spices upon the burial of our dead, than would suffice to offer at the Altars of the Heathen gods. And on this ground it hath hitherto been the piety of the Church of England, to lay the bodies of the dead into the Earth with all due solemnities; though now she stand accused for Superstition, even in this particular, in the conceit of some Novators, more precise than pious. Nay, if I understand aright the Apostles meaning, St. Paul derives a very strong Argument from this ancient custom, to prove the Resurrection of the dead against all opposers. Else what do they, saith he, which are baptised for dead? if the dead rise not again, why are they then baptised for dead 
e 1 Cor. 15.29. ? That is to say, and the Greek Text will bear it well, why do they use such frequent washings over the bodies of the dead, why are the dead baptised, as a man may say, with rich balms and ointments, why are they laid into the Earth with such costly oils; if there be no certainty of this, that even those bodies shall be raised to eternal glory?  
I know it is an hard place I am fallen upon: A place which hath as much perplexed the wits of our greatest Clerks, as any one in all Paul's Epistles. St. Ambrose doth expound this place of Baptism, applied unto some living man in the name and behalf of his friend dying without Baptism; out of a superstitious conceit, that Baptism so conferred upon one alive, in the name of him that was deceased, might be available to the Resurrection of the other dying unbaptised 
f Ambros. in 1 Cor. c. 15. , Atque ita vivus nomine mortui tingebatur, as the Father hath it. That there was Vicarium tale Baptisma 
g Tert. de Resurrect. Carn. , as Tertullian calleth it, amongst the Marcionites, is plain and evident; yea, and amongst the Cerinthians also, another sort of Heretics as bad as they. Epiphanius tells us of the quod sit 
h Epiph. de Cerinth. haer. 28. , that so indeed it was amongst them; and Chrysostom 
i Chrysost. in 1 ad Cor. c. 15.  informeth us of the manner of it. But that such a superstitious custom as baptising one man for another, in hope that other might receive the benefit and effect thereof, should creep so early into the Church of Corinth, as to get footing there within three years after the first Preaching of the Gospel to them (for no more time occurred between St. Paul's first Preaching there Anno 52 
k V. Baron. Annal. An. 52, 55. . and the writing of this first Epistle, which was in Anno 55.) is a thing not possible to be believed. Rather I think that mistaking of St. Paul's meaning in the place aforesaid, might give occasion to that erroneous practice amongst the Cerinthians, the wretched followers of Cerinthus; and then by a very easy mistake, it might be fastened on these Corinthians, as it seems it was. Others expound it of the Clinici, as they called them, in the former times, such as were sick upon their death beds, and being like to die, and as good as dead, desired the Sacrament of Baptism before their departure out of this life, in hope to find the better entrance by it, unto that to come. Most true it is, that this Baptismus Clinicorum, doth oft occur in Ancient Writers 
l Eus●●. hist. Eccles. l. 6▪ c. 42. , and in the Canons also of some former Councils, in which it was prohibited that any man so baptised should be admitted into holy Orders. But that this custom was in use in those early days, or that the people were permitted to defer their baptism till the extremity of sickness did enforce them to it, or did not rather receive it with the Faith itself, as well in Corinth, as elsewhere it is plain they did 
m Act. 16.33. & 19.5. & 16.25 , I can by no means be persuaded. Another Exposition hath been thought upon, and that too, borrowed from a custom as erroneous as that first delivered; which is, that many did desire in the former times to be baptised on or near the Sepulchers of the Martyrs, that so they might profess that Faith in the Resurrection, for which they were slain 
n Muscul. in 1 Cor. 15. . This Musculus reports of some, but of whom I know not: But sure I am, whosoever they were, they were exceedingly mistaken, in looking for the Tombs of Martyrs in the Church of Corinth, within three years, no more, after their conversion. And on the same leg, as I take it, halts the gloss of Chrysostom (whom Theophylact followeth) affirming it to be the custom of the Church of Corinth, that when they were to be baptised, they said over the Creed, and that as they said the words of this Article, viz. The Resurrection of the Body, the Sacrament of Baptism was conferred upon them 
o Chrys. in lo●. : And then the meaning must be this, Why are they then baptised for dead? that is to say, why are they then baptised into the resurrection of the dead, in case the dead rise not again? But first, there is no constat of any such custom; and if it were, it had been but a weak Argument in so strong a Disputant, to prove the Church's Doctrine in a point of Faith by the particular Church's custom, not elsewhere used, nor ever of such credit as to be continued. Finally, not to wander into more particulars, Lyra doth give this gloss upon it, Pro mortuis, i. e. pro peccatis mortalibus quae sunt opera mortua. Why are they then baptised for the dead? that is saith he, Why are they baptised for deadly sins, which are called dead works in holy Scripture; pro quibus abluendis accipitur Baptismus 
p Lyra in loc. , for washing away of which they receive that Sacrament. But this agrees not well with the following words; For being that the resurrection is of those that are so baptised, if by pro mortuis we must mean dead works, or our mortal sins, it may be then inferred by the Rules of Logic, that our dead works or mortal sins shall be also raised.  
Here is we see variety of Interpretations, and those well backed and countenanced by no mean authorities. But for all that I stand to my first Exposition, and doubt not but to make it more above all exception, than any of the rest before delivered. And for the proof of this I shall take for granted, that the Church of Corinth did consist especially of converted Gentiles, and such of the Grecizing jews which embraced the Gospel; and therefore being a mixed Assembly were to be spoken to in such forms of speech as were intelligible unto both. Secondly, I shall take for granted too, that howsoever the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, be taken in the Ecclesiastical notion, for giving or receiving of the Sacrament of Baptism, by which we are initiated in the Church of Christ: yet in the natural and original notion, they signify no more than a simple, ordinary, or common washing. And so they signify not only in the Heathen Authors, who understood, no doubt, the Idiom of their own natural language, but in the sacred Writers also. Certain I am, that so the word is used by St. Mark himself, after the institution of that holy Sacrament, and the appropriating of the word to that signification. For speaking of the often washings used amongst the Pharisees, he telleth us that when they come from the Market they eat not except they wash 
m Mark 7.4. ; and that they use the washing of pots and cups, of brazen vessels and of Tables. They do not eat unless they wash, as our English reads it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, unless they be baptised, saith the Greek Original; and answerably thereunto the Vulgar Latin, nisi baptizentur. So also for the following words, that they observe the washing of Pots and Cups, the Greek Text calleth it in plain terms, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. accordingly the Vulgar Latin, Baptismata Calicum & Vrceorum, i. e. the baptising of their Cups and Pots. We may add here a sort of Heretics amongst the Jews, who teaching the necessity of these daily washings or baptizings, were called Hemerobaptists; Not that they did every day reiterate the Sacrament of Baptism (they had not then been jews, but Christians, though erroneous Christians) but that they thought it necessary to dip themselves every day in water over head and ears (Singulis diebus in aqua mergi 
n Prat. de haeres. ) the better to preserve themselves (as they did suppose) from the pollutions of the flesh. Which being granted or premised concerning the original and natural use of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Baptizare, We will next endeavour to prove out of good authority, that both the Gentiles, and the Hellenistical or Grecizing jews, whereof the Church of Corinth at this time consisted, used constantly to wash (or if you will, baptise) the bodies of their dead, before their Funerals; and that this custom was observed also amongst the Christians, for a long time after. That it was in use amongst the Gentiles is evident by that of Ennius, where he telleth us of the good woman, who washed and anointed the body of Tarquin (Tarquinii corpus bona faemina lavit & unxit) to make it ready for the Grave. By that of Virgil touching the washing and anointing of the body of Misenus, viz. Corpusque lavant frigentis & ungunt 
o Virg. Aen. 6. . Thirdly, By those Funeral Officers, whom they called Pollinctores, which Tertullian speaks of in his Apologetic, who were to take the charge of burials, 
Tert. Apol. c. 13  and to see men decently interred. And they were called Pollinctores, quasi pollutorum (i. e. mortuorum) unctores, saith the learned Scholiast, from the anointing of dead bodies, according to that of Apuleius, Pollinctor ejus funeri, dum unctionem parat, etc. And finally, it will appear by that ancient custom of embalming their dead bodies used amongst the Egyptians (mention whereof is made in the last of Genesis) one part whereof consisted, as we read in Herodotus, of washing the corpse, and wrapping it in a fine linen cloth 
p Herodot. hist. in Euterp. ; So was it also with the Hellenistical or Grecizing jews, as appears plainly in the Acts concerning Tabytha 
q Act. 9 37. , whom being dead, they washed and laid her in an upper chamber. And though perhaps the Gentiles, whether Greeks or Romans, thought not of any such thing as a Resurrection, when they used this Ceremony; yet I conceive that at the first institution of it (before the light of rectified Reason was quite darkened in them) it did look that way: a resurrection unto judgement being so naturally imprinted in the soul of man, that it is every good man's hope that it shall be so, and every wicked man's fear that so it will be. Nor was this custom of washing the bodies of the dead in the Church of Corinth, peculiar unto them alone, or reckoned for a remnant of their old superstitions; but constantly retained as a decent Ceremony in most Christian Churches, to keep them up in hope of a resurrection; That so it was at Rome, for the Western Churches, is affirmed expressly by Tertullian in his Apologetic 
s Tert. Apol. cap. 42. , Rigere & pallere post lavacrum mortuus possum, saith he in his old vain of writing, which is dark and difficult: his meaning is, as Rhenanus 
s B. Rhenan. in Tertul. Apol.  and Pamelius after him observe, to show that it was the custom of the Primitive Church defunctorum corpora lavare, to wash the bodies of the dead when they laid them out. More plainly speaks Eusebius 
t Euseb. hist. Eccl. l. 7. c. 21.  for the Eastern Churches (or rather Dionysius out of whom he citys it) where making mention of the great plague in Alexandria, and the remarkable piety of the Christians towards their sick Brethren, he telleth us that they did not only close the eyes of the deceased, but also washed their dead bodies (corpora lavarunt & ad sepulturam ornarunt, as the story hath it) and decently adorned them for their burial. Lay all which hath been said together, and St. Paul's meaning will appear to be only this, that by the washing or baptising of their dead (call it which we will) by their anointing the dead bodies with such costly unguents, they might themselves conclude of a Resurrection. To what end else served all that cost and charges which they laid out on them, if they looked not for the resurrection of those bodies with such cost interred? And I the rather am confirmed in this Exposition, because I meet with the like phrase in another place. For as here we have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a washing or baptization of the dead; So in the book called Ecclesiasticus we meet with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the washing or baptization of a man, which ignorantly or unaware had polluted himself by the touching of a dead corpse or carcase, and was by such a washing or baptization to be made clean again, Qui baptizatur à mortuo, & iterum tangit eum, etc. 
u Eccles. 34.26.  He that washeth himself (so our English reads it) after the touching of a dead body, if he touch it again, what availeth his washing? where, though in our Translation it is called a washing, yet in the Greek and Latin both it is a baptization.  
Next to these positive and practical Proofs, we will add some natural and experimental Evidences which conclude the same, and are more within the compass of the observation of the meanest capacities. We see the Sun withdraweth from us every evening the comfort both of light and heat, and yet we doubt not of his rising on the morrow morning. We go to bed as to our grave, yielding ourselves to sleep-which is the image of death, with prayers and supplications to Almighty God, in hope to be restored unto sense and action on the day ensuing. We note it in the common course of the works of Nature, that Herbs and Plants, and all the Flowers of the field, do in the time of Winter seem to lose that life which made them flourish with more lustre than the Court of Solomon; but we observe withal, as a thing of course, that the next Spring returns them to their perfect beauties; Expectandum nobis etiam corporis ver est 
x Minut. Feli●▪ in Octavio. , we have a Spring to come, said the Christian Advocate. The Husbandman commits his seed unto the ground in expectation of a plentiful and joyful Harvest; his hope deceiveth him not at last, though that which he buried in the womb of the Earth, must die before it quicken unto life again. This is another of St. Paul's Arguments to our present purpose, Thou fool, saith he, that which thou sowest is not quicked except it die 
y 1 Cor. 15.36. , upon which words of the Apostle take this gloss or descant out of an old Greek M. S. in Bodleys' Liberarie. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. The Earth laboureth not after the ordinary manner of a woman in travel. Her Infant Corn is not quickened except it die. Should it live still it could not be form in that womb. The earth receiveth the bare corn only, and by corrupting it, restoreth it in a better fashion than she took it in 
z Cited by ●. Gregor. ch. 27. ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; And can we have saith he, a more forcible impression or representation of our own restitution, than by this example? Observing these things (as we do) in the works of Nature, how can we think so poorly of the Lord our God, as if it were not in his power with the like facility to re-give to us our former beauties, as either to the Plants or Planets? Should we make search into the secret and more wonderful works of prudent nature, we may be told by Pliny, That dead Bees are restored both to life and motion, only by sprinkling them with Nepenthe 
a Plinii Hist. Natur. ; young Pelican's by the blood of the old ones; and Eels, with vinegar and blood. The raising of the new Phoenix out of the ashes of the old one, hath been a thing so generally received over all the world, that for my part I dare not question it, though I know some do. And of the Swallows it is said, that at the beginning of Winter they use to fall down together in heaps into the dust or water, and there sleep in their Chaos; till hearing the voice of returning Nature at the Spring, they awaken out of this dead sleep, and live amongst the fowls of the Air again. And more than so, it is affirmed by George Maior a Germane writer 
b Geo. Mayor in 1 Cor. 15. , that he found a company of Swallows lying dead under an old Table in the Church of Witteberge, which by an artificial heat he restored to life, the ordinary time of nature being then not come, in which they should revive of course.  
This makes it plain, that nature is no Enemy to a Resurrection, by consequent, our Faith in this agreeable to the course of Nature, and not to be denied by a natural man; though no one Point or Article of the Christian Faith hath been more eagerly opposed by the ancient Gentiles, nor more pertinaciously decried by Heretical Christians. And howsoever men of inferior parts might make scruple of it, yet can I not but wonder at those great Philosophers that they should plead so earnestly against a Tenet so consonant to the ways and works of Nature, and otherwise not much a stranger to their own opinions. Themselves, both Platonists and Pythagoreans acknowledge an eternal being of the soul; and though the man did die, and his corpse was buried, yet the Soul lived again in another Body. And so the ancient Druids were persuaded also, Regit idem spiritus artus, Orb a●io 
c Lucan. Phars. l. 1. , as the Poet hath informed us of them. The truth of this opinion I dispute not here; I know it to be vain and foolish. Only I shall conclude from their own Position, and think the Argument will be good ad homines, That the same Soul may be as easily believed to live again in its own body, as in the body of another, made of purpose for it. And this Tertullian doth retort against those Philosophers, who did admit of this Pythagorean 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, this transmigration of the soul from body to body, and yet deny the Resurrection of that body, to which the Soul more naturally aught to be united, Si quaecunque ratio praeest animarum humanarum reciprocandarum, in corpora, cur non in eandem substantiam redeant, cum hoc sit restitui id esse quod fuerat 
d Tertul. Apol. cap 48. , as his words there are. That which most stumbled both these Philosophical and our Christian Heretics, was, That the faithful of the Primitive times did not only stand for the Assumption of a new Body (which perhaps the others would have granted with no great difficulty) but the Resurrection of the old: The restitution of a body which had either been consumed to ashes, eaten by Worms, devoured by Fishes and wild Beasts, and finally, incorporated into the substance of those Beasts and Fishes which had so devoured it. Which being thought impossible by some old Philosophers, and not well understood by some poor weak Christians, occasioned it on both sides to be called in question, and by some Christian Heretics to be more decried, than ever it had been by the Gentiles formerly. The Marcionites of old denied it, so did Marcus too; and so did Basilides, Cerdo, and the rest of that wicked brood. The Anabaptists and Socinians of these times do deny it also, although not on the same grounds as the former Heretics; by those it was denied, because thought impossible, in which, they and the Gentiles did agree together; by these, because they do not think it consonant to the Word of God, That flesh and blood should inherit the Kingdom of Heaven 
e 1 Cor. 15.50. ; as if there were no difference between the substance of flesh, and the infirmities and frailties which attend upon it, between a natural body, and a body glorified: Of which more anon.  
In the mean time to satisfy the doubts of those of what sort soever, which charge this Article of our Faith with impossibilities, we may demand of them these particulars (besides what hath been said to the point already,) viz. Whether it be not equally as possible to Almighty God, if not more possible, to recreate a man from something, than to create him first of nothing? Whether the natural substance of a man corrupted be not more apt to be recollected unto itself, than the dust of the Earth was in itself to be first framed to such a substance? Credamus ergo abeodem restitui posse veterem hominem, qui & novum fecit 
f Lactant. l. 7.23. , as it is excellently well pressed upon them by Lactantius. If for the manner of it, they would know by what arts and agents, so great a miracle as the raising of the same numerical body shall be wrought upon them, we must refer them to themselves, and in themselves they have an Answer. They all know so much of themselves, that they live, move, and have a being; that they are all engendered by their natural Fathers, and fashioned in the secret Closets of their Mother's womb; yet certainly it is a matter, if considered rightly, not very capable of credit, that so small a quantity of seed should either be improved into a substance of such different parts, as flesh, and blood, and bones, and sinews, or else divided into so many parts of such different substance: When at the last, the body is made fit to receive the soul, they cannot tell either by what means the soul is given, or the whole birth nourished. Lord I am fearfully and wonderfully made, said the Royal Psalmist 
g Psal. 139.14. . If then they know not by what means they were made at first, but shut up their enquiry in an admiration of the unsearchable power and wisdom of the most high God; why should they look to be resolved of all doubts and difficulties, touching the Resurrection of the selfsame bodies, and not refer that also to God's power and wisdom? Which was the answer of Tertullian to the Roman Sophisters, Red si potes rationem qua factus es, & tunc require qua fies 
h Tertul. Apol. cap. 48. , First render an account (saith he) how thou first wert made, and afterwards inquire how thou shalt be raised. But not to answer them with Questions after the manner of the old Socratical way of disputing; to illustrate our belief more fully in this Article, and gain theirs unto it, I will lay before them two such instances as will clearly carry it, except they think more meanly of the power of God, than of subservient nature and the force of art. It is the nature of the Loadstone to draw steel to it, that is a thing well known. And it is found of late by a strange experiment, that if a massy body of steel be ground to powder, and all the Atoms of it buried in a lump of Clay; yet will the powerful virtue of the Stone or Adamant, being gently moved upon the superficies of the Cake, attract into a lump all those dusts of steel, so strangely scattered and dispersed: Which though it be a wondrous power and effect of nature, yet comes it short of that which is done by art; The substance of the steel not being altered, though the parts attenuated 
i Notes on Scripture by Mr. Gregory. . For it is found by those who do trade in Chemistry, that the forms of things are kept invisibly in store, though the materials of the same be altered from what first they were; and that by virtue of those forms, the things themselves will be restored to their former being; which they make good by this experiment. They take a Flower or Plant, of what kind soever, in the Spring time, when it is in its fullest and most vigorous growth; and beat it in a Mortar, Root, Stalks, Flowers, and Leaves, until it be reduced to a confused Mass. Then after Maceration, Fermentation, Separation, and other workings of that art, there is extracted a kind of Ashes or Salt, including those forms and tinctures under their power and Chaos, which they put up in Glasses very close made up, the mouth of the Glass being heated in the fire, and the neck thereof wrung close together to keep in the Spirits. Which done, applying to it a soft fire or candle, you shall presently perceive the Flowers or Plants to rise up by little and little out of those Ashes, and to appear again in their proper forms, as when they grew upon the ground. But take away the fire or candle, and they remove immediately to their Chaos again. A wonderful effect of art and nature, such as not only doth resemble the Resurrection, but so far confirm it, that he who shall deny it for the time to come, will make the God of Heaven less powerful than the Sons of Art. The ingenuous Author of the Book called Religio Medici, doth also touch upon this rarity; but I have not now the Book by me to put down his words, or to make use of any other of his observations to the point in hand.  
And to say truth, there need but little more be added as to the Quod sit of the Resurrection, to the point itself. That which remains relates unto the manner only, to some points of circumstance, and to such Christian uses as are raised hereon.  
And first, Perhaps it may be demanded of us, as once of the Apostle in former times, Quali corpore venient, How, with what Bodies they shall rise 
k 1 Cor. 15.35. ? Not whether in the very same Numerical Body, for that hath been made good before, but whether in the same shape and fashion which before it had. We know that man returns again into his Earth at several ages; the tender Infant, and the Man of ripest years, being alike subject to the stroke of impartial death. In which respect it hath been questioned by the Ancients, whether they shall arise in the same age, and disproportions of Age and Stature, which they had whilst they lived. St. Augustine doth resolve it Negatively, and determineth thus, That we shall all of us be raised in that proportion both of strength and beauty, which men attain to commonly at the time of their best perfection. Restat ergo (saith he) ut suam quisque habeat mensuram vel quam habuit in inventute, vel quam habiturus esset, si vixisset 
l August. de Civit. l. 22. c. 13. . And this he groundeth on that passage to those of Ephesus, where the Apostle speaks of that special care which CHRIST hath taken of his Church, and our edification, till we all come to a perfect man, unto the measure of the fullness of the (age or) stature of CHRIST 
m Ephes. 4.13. , Ad mensuram plenitudinis aetatis Christi, that is to say, as he expounds it, Ad juvenilem formam, to that degree of age or stature which our Redeemer had attained to at the time of his passion, which was about the four and thirtieth year of his life, as may be gathered from the Scriptures.  
A second Quere hath been made concerning them which are diffigured and deformed, and mulcted as it were by nature, how, in what bodies they shall come in the Resurrection? Not with their imperfections, I conceive not so; for in the Heavens there shall be nothing not complete and of full accomplishment. And on the other side, were they freed of those imperfections, it may be said that then they are not raised in the selfsame bodies. To this we have the resolution of St. Augustine also, affirming, That in that glorious day, the substance of their bodies shall continue as before it was, but the deformities and imperfections shall be taken away. Corporibus ergo istis naturae servabitur, vitia autem detrahentur 
n August. de Civit. l. 22. c 16. , as the Father hath it. A resolution which St. Paul doth seem to favour, saying, That the body shall be raised in glory, though it be sown in dishonour 
o 1 Cor. 15. ; as do his following words the former, viz. Though it be sown in weakness (in the weakness of old age or infancy) shall be raised in power. For neither is it likely, that infancy being imperfection, and old age corruption, can stand with the estate of a glorified body; or that our Lord which made the blind to see, and the lame to go, which came to seek his grace on Earth, will not much rather heal them of their imperfections, whom he vouchsafeth to admit to the glories of Heaven. A glorious place is fit for none but glorified bodies: And so far glorified shall the bodies of God's servants be, as to be raised in power, whereby they shall be freed from all wants and weaknesses; in incorruption, which shall make them free both from death and sickness; in glory, which shall make them shine with a greater splendour, than any of the Stars of Heaven, as did the face of Moses in the Book of Exodus 
p Exod. 34.27. , and that of Stephen the Proto-martyr in the Book of the Acts 
q Acts 6.15. ; and lastly, in agility, by which they shall be like the Angels, mounting as on the wings of an Eagle to meet the Lord JESUS at his coming. In reference unto these spiritual qualities, St. Paul affirms, That it was sown a natural body, but shall be raised a spiritual body 
r 1 Cor. 15.44. : Natural for the substance still, spiritual for the qualities and endowments of it. Spiritualia post Resurrectionem erunt corpora, non quia corpora esse desistunt, sed quia spiritu vivificante subsistunt, as St. Augustine hath it.  
Another Quere yet remaineth, which had been moved, it seems, in St. Augustine's time, by some, whose curiosity did exceed their judgements. The Question was, Whether the woman should be raised to eternal glory, in her own sex, or the more noble sex of man? Alas poor Souls! what monstrous crime had they committed, that they should be excluded from the Kingdom of Heaven? Of what strange errors and mistakes must guilty-nature be accused when she framed that sex (or rather God when he created it at first out of Adam's side) by which it is supposed uncapable of immortality? Yes certainly, say they, for it seemeth to us, that Christ hath so adjudged it, saying, That in the Resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage 
s Matth. 22.30. : And if no marriage, than no woman; the woman being therefore made, that she might be married. Vain men, why do they talk so idly in the things of God Nuptias negavit dominus in resurrectione futuras, non foeminas 
t August. de Civit. Dei. l. 23. c. 17. , as St. Augustine noteth. The Lord hath not excluded women from the Resurrection; only in answer to a captious Question which the Saduces made, he returned them this, That in that day there should be neither care nor notice taken of those worldly matters. This is the sum and substance of our Saviour's Answer, and this is nothing to the prejudice of the Sex or Persons. Nor need we doubt, but as that Sex have done most acceptable service to the Lord their God, either in keeping constantly the faith of wedlock, or in preserving carefully an unspotted chastity, or suffering resolutely for the testimony of the Faith and Gospel; so shall they also in those bodies receive the crown reserved for so great obedience. But what need more be said of this needless Quere, which Christ our Saviour hath prevented and resolved already? Who therefore first appeared to those of the Female Sex, that making them the publishers of his Resurrection, he might assure them of their own, Qui ergo utrumque sexum instituit, utrumque restituet 
u August. de Civit. l. 22. c. 17. . God, saith St. Augustine, as he made both Sexes, will restore both Sexes, and raise up both in their own proper and original being unto. Life eternal.  
Other particulars of the manner of this Resurrection, as the dreadful terror of the day, the sounding of the Trump, the conflagration of the world, and the like to these; have either been already handled, or else will fall within the compass of the following Article. That which remains to be considered at the present, will be matters practical; first, in relation to our friends, and then in reference to our selves, and our own affairs.  
First, in relation to our Friends, That we bemoan not their departure with too great extremity, or sorrow for them without hope 
x 2 Thes. 4.13. , as if lost for ever. Were it indeed so irrecoverable a los●, that either their bodies were for ever banished from their souls, or that their souls did die and perish with their bodies, it were a misery to which no sorrow could be equal: But being so assured of a Resurrection, it is not to be supposed of them which die in the Lord, that they are either lost to themselves or us; They only have withdrawn themselves for a certain season, from the vanity and troubles of this present world, and shall return at last unto life again, both to our comfort and their glory. In this respect, it was the ancient custom of the Church of Greece, and is not yet worn out of use, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
y Matth. Blastares in Mr. Greg. c. 21. , To set boiled Corn before the Singers of the holy Hymns, which are accustomed to be sung at the commemoration of the dead who sleep in Christ And this they do to manifest their hopes in the Resurrection, of which the Corn is so significant an emblem, as before was shown. And to say truth, Death, if considered rightly, is the gate of life, and of a life not to be shaken with adversities, or subject unto change of fortune. Hanc Deus fidei praestat gratiam, ut mors quam vitae constat esse contrariam instrumentum foret per quod in vitam transiretur, it is St. Augustine's note 
z August. de Civit. Dei. l. 13. c. 4  But what need Augustine be alleged, when we may hear the same of the ancient Druids? of whom the Poet tells us, that they held this Paradox, Longae, (canitis si cognita) vitae Mors media est 
a Lucan. Pharsal. l. 1. , That death was but the middle way to a longer life. If then our Ancestors in those dark times of ignorance, when they knew not Christ, conceived no otherwise of death, and the terrors of it, than as the way unto a life of more excellent nature; then certainly, a nobler and mo●e cheerful constancy must ●eeds be looked for at our hands, who are not only more assured of the immortality of the soul, which they blindly guessed at, but of the Resurrection of the Body also, which they never heard of.  
The next consideration doth concern our selves, and lessoneth us not to set so high a price upon our lives, but that we may be willing to lay them down, as often as the preservation of Religion, the safety of our Country, or the necessary service of the State do require it of us. A duty which we should not doubt to discharge most gladly, did we consider as we ought, that loss of life on such occasions, is but like the putting off of our garments over night, to be worn again upon the morrow. For certainly those men acquit themselves with the bravest spirit, who least regard the terrible approach of death. Nor can there be a stronger Motive to induce us to it, than that the Bodies, so abandoned to the Sword of the Enemies, or to the Persecutors of the Church of God, shall be revived, and reunited to the Soul again. It is reported of the Druids, whom before I spoke of, that they taught amongst these Northern Nations, not only an immortality of the Soul, but a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or transmigration of it into other bodies. And it was thought an happy error to be so persuaded; for being throughly possessed with this opinion, they never feared to run upon the greatest dangers, to brave them with undaunted courage, and to encounter with the violentest and most terrible engigns which were then invented. So poor a matter was it thought to be coy and sparing of those lives which they were sure to find again in another body 
b Id. ibid. .  
Felice's errore suo, quos ille timorum  
Maximus, haud urget, lethi metus; inde ruendi  
In ferrum mens prona viris, animaeque capaces  
Mortis, & ignavum est rediturae parcere vitae.  
Which may thus be Englished. 
Thrice happy they, whom the extremest fear  
Of death afflicts not, who upon the spear  
Dare boldly run, and in their hearts disdain  
To spare that life which shall return again.  How brave a courage than ought we to carry with us in our Christian Warfare, who have such excellent advantages above those Ancients? To us it is ascertained by the Word of God, not that our souls shall be transmitted into other bodies, but be conveyed immediately to a place of rest, there to expect a Resurrection of those bodies which before they lived in. To us it is ascertained by the Word of God, that each several Atom of the body shall be recollected, and married to the soul for ever, that the bones which were broken may rejoice; and that the body and soul being thus united, shall pass immediately into the glories of eternal life prepared for them before the beginnings of the world. A brave encouragement to gallant and heroical resolutions: Preciumque & causa laboris 
c Ovid. Meta l. 5. , in the Poet's language, The cause and recompense of all our labours.  
But some I know have otherwise provided for themselves than so, and found out a Terrestrial Paradise, wherein they shall enjoy for a thousand years all the pleasures of Earth, before they be admitted to the joys of Heaven: A fancy, if I may so call it, of no mean antiquity, defended by some principal men of the first times of the Church, who took it upon trust, without more enquiry; and having made it better than at first they found it, commended it unto the Church for good Catholic doctrine. For some there were, even in the infancy of the Gospel, who being too much in love with this present world, conceited to themselves such a sensual and voluptuous kind of life, after the Resurrection from the dust of the Earth, wherein they should have use of women, and wallow in all carnal and libidinous pleasures, which the most Epicurean soul could affect or covet. A fancy merely jewish in its first original, afterwards entertained by some Heretical judaizing Christians, and finally, rather rectified than refelled by many of the Fathers in the Primitive times.  
And first beginning with the jews, we showed in our discourse of the Kingdom of Christ 
d Chap. 14. Part 2. , how much they were besotted with the expectation of a Temporal Monarchy, looking for such a Messiah as should come with power, restore again the Crown of judah to the house of David, and make that Commonwealth more formidable to the Neighbouring Princes, than ever it had been in the times before. And to befool themselves the more in this fond conceit, there was no promise nor no prophecy in the Old Testament, intended to the building up of the Spiritual Temple, or to the raising of Christ's Kingdom in the souls of men, which they applied not to the founding of a Temporal Monarchy, the repairing of jerusalem, the new erecting of the Temple, and to the re-establishment of Circumcision, and other of the Rites and Ceremonies of the Law of Moses. Concerning which consult St. jerom, in his Comment on Isai. 31. and on Ezek. 36. and on Micah 4. Tertullian in his third Book against Martion, cap. ult. and divers others of the Ancients (not to say any thing in this place of the jewish Rabbins, who run all that way:) In which it will appear, that they both did and do expect a restitution of their temporal power, and all the pleasures of a rich and flourishing Empire, which are most correspondent to a carnal mind. Which fancy being taken up, and so strongly fixed, that there was no removing of it out the hearts of the jews, was forthwith entertained by some nominal Christians, who out of a compliance with that obstinate people, embraced not only many of their Rites and Ceremonies, but of their dreams and fancies also: Whom therefore jerom calleth Christianos judaizantes, judaizing Christians, in many places of his works, in which, judaei & Christiani judaizantes, or, judaei & eorum erroris haeredes, the jews and those that do inherit their Superstitions, march along together. Of these, the first was that Arch-heretick Cerinthus, who did not only set on foot in the Church of Christ, the Festivals and Sacrifices of the Law of Moses; but also taught, Regnum Christi post Resurrectionem terrenum fuisse 
e Euseb. Eccles. hist. l. 3. c. 25. , & carnem nostram Hierosolymis cupiscentiis & voluptatibus carni servituram, That after the Resurrection, Christ should have an Earthly Kingdom, in which his followers should enjoy, in their New jerusalem, all the delights and pleasures of the flesh, of what kind soever. And this not only to endure for a little while, the ordinary life a man, or so, but for a thousand years complete, as Nicephorus addeth 
f Niceph. Eccles. hist. l. 3. c. 14. . Marcus another leading Heretic was of this opinion; and so was Nepos also, an Egyptian Bishop, who teaching first, That all the promises made by God in holy Scripture, judaico more reddendas esse, were to be understood according to the jewish Glosses 
g Euseb. hist. Eccles. l. 7. c. 22, 23. , did thereon build this following Tenet, That the Saints should for a thousand years enjoy all manner of corporal delights and pleasures in the Kingdom of Christ, which after the resurrection should be founded here upon this earth. Against this Nepos and his doctrine in this particular, Dionysius that great and learned Bishop of Alexandria wrote a full discourse, which he entitled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, A Discourse of Promises; and finding that he grounded his erroneous Tenets on the Revelation, he wrote another on that Book, which he inscribed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or The confutation and reproof of the Allegorists. Nor did he labour by his pen only, but by conference too; making a journey (or Episcopal Visitation) into Arsenois, a Province of Egypt, where this opinion was most cherished, of purpose to dispute down this erroneous Doctrine. In which he sped so answerably unto his desires, that many of the chief Sticklers in it did recant their error 
d Dionys. Alex. ap. Euseb. l. 7.23 , et veritatem una nobiscum confite bantur, and cheerfully embrace that truth which he brought unto them.  
This Doctrine being set on foot, though by such vile Heretics, and seeming to have ground and countenance from the Revelation, was by the Fathers and other Writers of the first times of the Church, thought fitter to be rectified and reform, than abandoned wholly. And thereupon a new conceit was taken up, and dispersed abroad unto this effect, That after the Resurrection Christ should have an Earthly Kingdom, the principal Seat whereof should be Jerusalem; Jerusalem new built of gold, and most precious stones (Jerusalem aurea & gemmata 
e Hieron. in Praef. ad Isa. , as St. Hierom calleth it) in which the Saints should reign with him for a Thousand years in all manner of happiness, and after that accompany him to the Heaven of Heavens, and there live for ever. This was the sum of the Opinion thus refined and rectified. But for the Readers satisfaction and my own together, I shall describe it more at large, that we may see the better what we are to think of it; and therein I shall follow Lactantius chiefly, who hath more copionsly presented the true state thereof, than any other of the Ancients. By him we are informed, that after the destruction of the Roman Empire, which must be utterly subverted before any of these things shall come to pass 
f Lactant. l. 7. c. 16. , there shall follow great plagues, unseasonable weather, a general mortality of all living Creatures, many strange Prodigies in the Air, the Stars fall down from Heaven, and the whole course of nature shall be out of order. Things being in this dreadful state, the Lord shall send into the world the great Prophet Elias, who shall convert many unto God, with great signs and wonders; but in the middle of his work, Antichrist shall arise out of Syria, encounter with that great Prophet, kill him in the Fight, leaving him for three days unburied, after which time he shall revive, and be taken up into Heaven 
g Cap. 17. . After this shall presently ensue a terrible persecution of those righteous persons, who will not worship this proud Tyrant, calling himself the Son of God, and practising to seduce the people after the working of Satan, by power, and signs, and lying wonders; insomuch that all the Saints shall be compelled to retire themselves into the Wilderness, and there abide in great distress, calling continually for help to the Lord their God. For their relief Christ shall descend at last with the Hosts of Heaven, fight with this dreadful Tyrant, overthrew him often 
h Cap. 19 , and finally, take him and his Confederates Prisoners, whom he shall presently condemn to their merited torments. Then shall the graves be opened, and the bodies of the Saints shall arise 
i Cap. 20. , and stand before the judgement seat of Christ, the Conqueror, and being united to their souls, shall be incorporated with those righteous persons which are found alive, and both together constitute an earthly Kingdom to our Lord and Saviour, who shall reign over them (or with them, rather) for a Thousand years; triumphing over the remainder of their mortal Enemies, who shall not be extinguished, but preserved to perpetual slavery. During this time the Devil shall be bound in chains that he do not hurt the Saints inhabiting the holy City in all peace and happiness 
k Cap. 24. ; the Sun shall show more glorious than ever formerly; the Earth become more fruitful than it was before, producing most delicious fruits of its own accord; the Rocks shall yield the sweetest honey, and all the Rivers flow with Milk and Wine. After which Thousand years expired, the Devil, that old Murderer, shall get loose again; stir up the Nations of the Earth to destroy the Saints; and not only lay siege unto the holy City 
Cap. 26. : But fire, and hail, and tempests from the Heavens above, shall make so general and terrible a destruction of them, that for Seven years there shall no other wood be burat but their Spears and Targets. Then shall the Saints be brought into the presence of Almighty God, whom they shall serve for evermore; and at the same time shall be the Second and most general Resurrection, in which the wicked shall be raised to eternal torments, and damned for ever to the lake of fire and brimstone.  
This is the substance of the Story, as Lactantius telleth it; which, whether it have more of the jew or of the Poet in it, it is hard to say. That of the great defeat of Antichrist, and the burning of the Spears and Shields for Seven years together, is branded by St. Hierom for a piece of an old Talmudical Tale, the jewish Rabbins making the like endless fables 
m Hieron. in Ezek. 39  (interminabiles fabulas, as the Father calleth them) of Gog and Magog, who for a while shall tyrannize so cruelly over those of Israel, but be at last subdued and slain with as great an overthrow as he affirmeth of Antichrist, and his Confederates. That of the flourishing estate of Christ's earthly Kingdom, was reckoned in those times when it was most countenanced, to be but a Poetical fiction; Figmenta haec esse Poetarum quidam putant 
n Lactant. l. 7. c. 22. , as Lactantius doth himself acknowledge. And more than so, he seemeth to refer his Reader for a further description of this Kingdom to the works of the Poets; affirming positively, that all those characters shall be verified of this Kingdom of Christ (I mean this Millenarian Kingdom) Quae Poetae aureis temporibus facta esse dixerunt, which by the Poets are affabulated of the golden age; for proof whereof, for fear we should not take his word, he puts down a description of it out of Virgil's works. But in my mind his own description of it comes more near to Ovid's, who thus concludes his Map or Character of that blessed time 
o Ovid. Metam. l. 1. .  
Mox etiam fruges Tellus inarata ferebat,  
Nec renovatus Ager gravidis canebat aristis:  
Flumina tum Lactis, tum flumina Nectaris ibant,  
Flavaque de viridi stillabant Ilice Mella.  
Which is thus Englished by Geo. Sandys.  
The fruitful Earth Corn un-manured bears,  
And every year renews her golden Ears:  
With Milk and Nectar were the Rivers filled,  
And yellow Honey from green Elms distilled.  
But whether it were jewish or Poetical, or compounded of both, the fancy being once taken up, proved very acceptable, as it seems, in those elder times, to most sorts of people both in the East and Western Churches, who did not look upon it in its first Original, or as it was obtruded on the Church by Heretics; but as by some good pious men it was refined and rectified, and so commended to them for a Catholic point. And he that took the pains to refine it first, and make it more agreeable to an Orthodox ear, was Papias Bishop of Hierapolis a City of Phrygia, a pious man, Sed modico admodum judicio praeditus 
p Euseb. Eccl. hist. l. 4. c. 36. , but otherwise of mean parts and of little judgement. And yet because of the opinion which the world had of him, he was herein followed by Irenaeus, and some others, as Eusebius telleth us; who perhaps might think it a good bargain if they could better the opinion, and thereby hope to get the jews and the judaizers to come over to them. St. Hierom speaks of him as the first who published that jewish Tradition of Christ's earthly Kingdom (the first, he meaneth that published it so refined and bettered,) and that after the Resurrection the Saints should reign together with the Lord in the flesh for a Thousand years. Hic dicitur mille annorum judaicam edidisse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, dicens post resurrectionem Dominum in carne cum Sanctis regnaturum, as he tells us of him 
q Hier. de Eccl. Scriptor. . And then he adds, That he was followed herein by Iraeneus and Apollinarius, as also by Tertullian in his book De spe fidelium, by Victorinus Pictaviensis, and Lactantius, Gennadius adds Tychonius Afer 
r Gennad. de vir. illust. , who in his Commentaries on the Revelation did affirm the same. And so did also justin Martyr, Melito Sardensis, and Severus Sulpitius in the life of St. Martin. So did St. Augustine for a while (Hoc etiam & was aliquan do opinati sumus 
i August. de Civit. l. 20. c. 7. , as himself informs us,) but after, upon better consideration, he receded from it. By all these it is held for a truth undoubted, That Christ shall come down from Heaven in the end of the world, and converse with men, and govern them with Peace and justice; and that the Saints which shall be raised, and they who shall be found alive at the time of his coming, shall reign with him a thousand years, and serve the Lord with righteousness and perfect holiness. So far they generally agree, though some not fully cleared of the former errors, (and amongst them Lactantius must go for one) conceived, That those just men who were found alive, should generate an infinite number of subjects 
k Lactant. l. 7. c. 24. , (infinitam multitudinem generibunt) with which to people this New Kingdom. The greatest difference amongst them did consist in this, Whether the computation of this Millenary or thousand years, was to commence before, or after the day of judgement; Lactantius being of opinion that it should be after 
l Ibid. cap. 20. ; but justin Martyr, and most others, that these thousand years should be first accomplished 
m justin Mart. in Dial. cum Tryph. , and then the general Resurrection, and the day of judgement, should succeed immediately. And though St. Augustine for his part, did think the opinion thus reform to be somewhat tolerable; yet being vehemently opposed by jerom, who upon all occasions doth declare against it, accounting it but a remainder of the jewish dotages, it became by little and little to be less esteemed, and in a very short time after to be quite deserted. Nor was it ever since revived till these later times, in which the Anabaptists first gave the hint unto it; and since that numerous brood of Sectaries which have swarmed from them, have once more published it abroad to the view of the world.  
As for the ground on which those Ancient Writers built this Kingdom●hey ●hey either were some promises made by God to the house of Israel, concerning the coming and the Kingdom of Christ, in the time of the Gospel; or else some words of Christ himself, which they interpreted that way; or finally, some passages in the Revelation, which did directly seem to give countenance to it.  
First, For the Promises made by God in the Old Testament, however they may seem to favour those of that opinion; yet is it candidly acknowledged by Tertullian (though he held the Tenet) That they were to be understood non de terrena sed coelesti promissione 
n Tertul. adv. Martion. l. 3. ult. , of heavenly, not of earthly promises. In the New Testament, the first place which they build upon, is that in the nineteenth of St. Matthew, where it is said, That every one who hath forsaken Houses, or Brethren, or Sisters, or Father, or Mother, or Wife, or Children, for my Names sake, shall receive an hundred fold, and shall inherit everlasting life 
o Matth. 19.29. ; that is to say, according to St. Marks expression, An hundred fold now in this life time, and in the world to come life everlasting 
p Mark 10.30. . But that this is not to be understood in a literal sense, nor the accomplishment thereof to be made in that Golden Kingdom, St. jerom reasoneth very tartly, For then, saith he, it needs must follow, Ut qui unam uxorem pro domino dimiserit, centum recipiat in futuro 
q Hierom. in Matth. 19 , that he who doth forsake one wife for the love of Christ, should in that Kingdom of theirs receive an hundred: Which how absurd it were, he leaves them to judge. In the next place, they fasten upon that of Luke, in which our Saviour said unto his Apostles, That they should eat and drink at the same Table with him in his Kingdom 
r Luke 22.30. . But neither these words must be taken literally, as they seem to sound, or if they be, they will be found directly contrary unto that of St. Paul, assuring us, That the Kingdom of God is not meat and drink, but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost 
s Rome 14.17. . The like may be replied to that other place, by them alleged to this purpose 
t Hier. in Epl. ad Hedib. , viz. I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the Vine, until that day when I shall drink it new with you in my Father's Kingdom 
u Matth. 26.29. . These words St. jerom doth interpret of the Blood of Christ, not to be drank, unless we do ascend with him into the upper Chambers of the Heavens above, and from his hands receive the Cup of the New Testament, Et inebriemur ab eo vino sobrietatis, and be made drunken, as it were, with the Wine of Sobriety. Which Answer, how it satisfied the Millenarians, I am not able to say; but I profess sincerely, it doth not satisfy me: Nor have I met with any Exposition of this difficult place, which doth not leave it as perplexed as before it was. And yet I am not of the mind, that it can possibly be alleged in favour of the Millenarians, because it is in Regno Patris mei, in my Father's Kingdom, which generally is used in Scripture for the Kingdom of Heaven; and not in Regno meo, my Kingdom, or the Kingdom of Christ, as in that of Luke: Though that of Luke be but a metaphorical form of speech, and signifieth no more than that degree of nearness to their Lord and Saviour, which the Apostles should obtain in the Kingdom of Glory, such as is commonly between those who ordinarily did eat, drink, and sit down together at the selfsame Table. And therefore unto these, and such Texts as these, which speak of eating and drinking, or sitting down with Abraham, Isaac, and jacob, in the Kingdom of Heaven 
x Matth. 8.11. , there cannot be given a better answer, than that which Christ returned to the captious Saducees, viz. That in the Kingdom of Heaven, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the Angels of God 
y Matth. 22.30.  And if they are as the Angels of God, there shall be neither eating nor drinking then; we are sure of that. Nor is it like that glorified and immortal Bodies, alimoniis terrenis sustentanda sint, can be sustained with corruptible and earthly food 
z Hierom. Praefat. ad 18. lib. in Isai. . For as jerom very well inferreth, Vbi cibus, sequuntur & morbi, etc. Where there is meat, there will be sickness; where there is sickness, death will follow, and after that another Resurrection is to be expected, and then another thousand years to be added to that, Et sic de coeteris. As for those passages alleged from the Revelation, if they be literally understood, they seem to be expressly for the Millenarians; but then withal it draweth after it such inconsequences, as plainly overthrow their whole foundation. For I hope they will provide themselves of a better Supper 
a Apoc. 19.17, 18. , Than to eat the flesh of Kings, and the flesh of Captains, and the flesh of Mighty-men, and the flesh of Horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both bond and free, and small and great? Such cheer, and such an earthly paradise as they seem to dream of, will agree but ill.  
I must desire to be excused for calling it a Dream of an earthly paradise; for I am verily persuaded, that it is no other. It hangs upon such doubtful proofs, and is so differently reported by the Patrons of it, that never sick-man's dream was more incoherent. Which that we may the better see, and see withal how every one added somewhat of his own unto it, according as the strength or weakness of his fancy led him, I shall put down a memorable passage of Gennadius, which most fully speaks it, In divinis repromissionibus nihil terrenum vel transitorium expectamus, sicut Melitani sperant; Non nuptiarum copulam, sicut Cerinthus & Marcus delirant; Non quod ad cibum vel ad potum pertinet, sicut Papiae Autori Irenaeus, Tertullianus, & Lactantius acquiescunt: Neque per mille Annos Resurrectionem regnum Christi in terra futurum, & Sanctos cum illo in deliciis regnaturos speramus, sicut Nepos docuit, qui primam justorum Resurrectionem & secundam impiorum confinxit 
b Gennad. de Eccles. dogmat. . By which we see that Melito did fancy only a transitory and earthly Kingdom; Cerinthus and Marcus introduced the use of the marriagebed; Papias seemed to be content with eating and drinking; and Nepos found out the distinction (to make all complete) between the first and second Resurrection; making the first to be only of the just and righteous, the second of the wicked and impenitent sinner, after the end or expiration of the thousand years. This is the Genealogy or Pedigree of this Opinion, which hath of late begun to revive among us, and finds not only many followers but some Champions also. Whom I desire more seriously to consider in their better thoughts, whether this their supposed Kingdom of our Lord and Saviour, commended to the world by some Ancient Writers, gave not the first hint unto Mahomet's Paradise 
c Sandys Relation of his Travels. ; In which he promiseth to those who observe his Law, most delicious dwellings, adorned with flowery Fields, watered with Crystalline Rivers, and beautified with Trees of Gold, under whose comfortable shade they shall spend their time with amorous Virgins, and be possessed of all voluptuous delights, which to a sensual minded-man are the greatest happiness. I know that some of late times, and of eminent note, have given us this opinion in a better dress; delivering upon probable grounds, That before the end of the world, there shall be a time in which the Church of Christ shall flourish for a thousand years, in greater purity and power, both for faith and manners, and in more outward lustre and external glory, than hitherto it hath done in all former ages. Coelius Secundus Curio in his Book De Amplitudine Regni Dei, P. Cunaeus in that De Repub. judaeorum, Du Moulin in his Christian Combat, Piscator in his Comment on the Revelation, Alstedius in a Tract of his, called Diatribe de mille Annis Apocalypticis, and divers others not inferior unto them for parts and learning, have declared for it. And for my part I see no danger in assenting to it: If this will satisfy the Millenarians, they shall take me with them; but if they stand too stiffly to their former tendries, and look not for this flourishing time of the Gospel till the Resurrection of the just be first accomplished, and then expect to have their part and portion in the pleasures of it, I must then leave them to themselves. The method of my Creed doth persuade me otherwise; which from the Resurrection of the Body leads me on immediately unto the joys and glories of eternal everlasting life; to which now I hasten.  
I know it doth much trouble many pious and sober men to find the force and efficacy of our Saviour's Argument, in the place foregoing, which seems more plainly to assert the Immortality of the Soul, than the Resurrection of the Body; the bodies of Abraham, Isaac, and jacob, being dissolved into dust in the time of Moses, though their souls were living with their God.  
Concerning which we are to know, 1. That the Sadduces by whom this Question was propounded, did not alone deny the Resurrection of the dead, but so as to affirm withal, 
Antiq. Jud. l. 18. c. 2.  Animas cum corporibus extingui, That the Soul itself did also perish with the body, as josephus tells us, They said, that there was neither Angel nor Spirit, 
Acts 23.8.  as St. Luke says of them. 2. That though the Pharisees who were their opposite faction, in the latter end of the jewish state, did grant a Resurrection, or Reviviscency from the dead, yet was it after such an Animal and Carnal sense, in eating, drinking, and conversing with women, (In qua cibo & potu opus esset, & conjugia rursum jungerentur, etc. saith my Author of them) as the Mahometans now dream of in their sensual paradise. And against this absurd opinion (as indeed it was) the Sadduces had found out that Argument about a woman which had or might have had seven Husbands by the Law of Moses, whose writings only they received as Canonical Scripture, desiring to be satisfied in their curiosity, to which of the seven she should be wife at the Resurrection. Which when the Pharisees could not answer (as keeping to those principles indeed they could not) they thought to put our Saviour to it at the selfsame weapon. But they found there another manner of Spirit, than what had spoken to them, by, and in the Pharisees: For Christ who knew their hearts, found their cunning also. And therefore did so shape his answer, as by declaring the true nature of the Resurrection against the Pharisees, to justify the Immortality of the Soul against the Sadduces. 1. Then, he tells them how much they were mistaken in the nature of the Resurrection, for want of a right understanding of the holy Scriptures (Erratis nescientes Scripturas, 
Matth. 22.29.  as the Vulgar reads it.) The Scriptures which do speak of a Resurrection, not being to be understood in such an Animal and Carnal sense, as the Pharisees did understand them. Those bodies which were sown in corruption, were to be raised again incorruptible, 
1 Cor. 15.  and therefore not to live by the food which perisheth: Those bodies which were sown in their mortality, by reuniting with the Soul, should become immortal, and therefore not to stand in need of any Seminal or Carnal way of Propagation; 
Luk. 20.36.  For in the Resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; neither can they die any more, but are as the Angels of God in Heaven, in the condition of their being, as to those particulars. This said, and so much of their doubt resolved, as concerned the error of the Pharisees, he lets them see the weakness of their own opinion, touching the annihilation or extinguishment of the Immortal soul of man: And that too from the works of Moses, which themselves embraced, without consulting any other of the holy Penmen: For when God said to Moses in the present tense, I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, it must needs be, that Abraham, Isaac, and jacob, must be accounted of as living at that present time, and living otherwise they were not at that present time, but as their blessed Souls did live in the sight of God, their Bodies being long before consumed and perished; though even those bodies by the infinity of comprehension which is in God, might be looked upon as living also, in reference to that eternal life which was prepared for them in the day of the Resurrection. And this I take to be the meaning of St. Luke, who doth not only say in the present tense, That the dead are raised, but adds these following words to the other Evangelist, 
Luk. 20.38.  viz. For all live in him; that is to say, All men, though buried in their dust, are living in the sight of Almighty God, who sees at once all things that have been, are, and shall be unto all eternity, as if present with him; and consequently beholds the Souls of his righteous servants, Abraham, and Isaac, and the rest, in the bliss of Paradise, as if apparelled with those bodies which before they had. So then, the Immortality of the Soul being so fully proved by our Saviour's Argument, The Resurrection of the dead (being the thing which seemed to be scrupled by the Sadduces) was concluded also, and yet not such a Resurrection the Pharisees dreamt of, in which there should be marrying, and giving in marriage (that is to say, In which things should be ordered by the rules of this present life) but such a one, wherein the Saints of God should be like the Angels, discharged from all relations incident to flesh and blood, exempt from all humane affections of what sort soever. For certainly, had not the Argument concluded strongly and convincingly to the point proposed, neither the Scribes, men better studied in the Scriptures, than any of the rest of the jewish Nation, had given this testimony to it, 
Luk. 10.9.  Magister dixisti benè, as we see they did, nor had the mouths of such curious and captious Sophisters been muzzled, as we see they were from ask him the like Questions for the time to come, both which the story tells us in the close of all. But I have stayed too long on this Text of Scripture, it is now time I should proceed to the rest that follows.    

ARTICLE XII. Of the Twelfth Article OF THE CREED, Ascribed to St. MATHIAS. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. (i. e.) Et Vitam Aeternam. Amen. (i. e.) And the Life Everlasting. Amen.  

CHAP. VIII. Of the Immortality of the Soul, and the glories of Eternal Life prepared for it; As also of the place and torment of Hell. Hell-fire not metaphorical but real. The conclusion of all.  
MOrs non extinguit hominem, sed ad praemium virtutis admittit 
a Lactant. l. 7. c. 10. , Death, saith Lactantius, doth not put an end to the life of man, but rather openeth him a way to receive the recompense of his well deservings. For though the body be returned unto the earth out of which it was taken, and that there were no Resurrection to be looked for, for it; yet in the better part, the soul, he is incorruptible and immortal, not subject to the stroke of death, nor to be made a prey unto worms and rottenness. In this respect it is to be disposed of in some suitable place, and to be punished or rewarded in a suitable manner; none but an Everlasting Life, or eternal punishments, being the doom thereof in the world to come, according to the good or evil which in this world it hath projected or accomplished. Now that the Soul of man is not only a spiritual essence which actuates the body in the which it is, but an immortal essence too, which shall over-live it, we have good proof in holy Scripture, and that both from the Old Testament and from the New. The souls of the righteous, saith the wise man, are in the hands of the Lord 
b Wisd. 3.1. . And though the Body go down into the Earth, yet the Soul returneth unto him that gave it 
c Eccl. 10.7. , saith a wiser than he. But behold a greater than Solomon, or the wisdom of Solomon, even CHRIST the wisdom of the Father hath affirmed the same; not only commending his own Soul to Almighty God 
d Luk. 23.46. , but teaching St. Stephen 
e Act. 7.59. , and all the rest of the Saints in him, how to do the like; This day, saith he to the good Thief, thou shalt be with me in Paradise. And more than so, he doth convincingly conclude the immortality of the Soul from those words in Exod. 
f Exod. 3.6. . I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of jacob, which sufficiently doth prove that point. This day thou shalt be with me in Paradise. Not in their bodies either of them, for the body of the one was on the cross, and the other in the Grave till the resurrection. It must be therefore in their Souls, which neither the Cross could crucify, nor the Grave bury. St. john affirmeth the same as a matter of fact, which in the former Texts (except that of Exodus) we find but in hope or promise; For speaking of the estate of the Saints departed, which he beheld as clearly in an heavenly Rapture, as if it had been a thing done before his eyes, he telleth us that he saw under the Altar, the souls of them that were slain for the Word of God, and for the testimony which they had 
g Apoc. 6.9, 10 , And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long O Lord, holy and true, delayest thou to judge and avenge our blood upon them that dwell on the earth? And of this nature is that passage in St. Luke's Gospel, though perhaps it be but Parabolical, in which the Soul of Lazarus is carried into Abraham's bosom, as soon as it had left his body. So that the wonder is the greater, if the tale be true, that Paul the third, a Christian, and a Christian Prelate, one of the Popes of Rome in these later Ages, should make doubt hereof, as they say he did; Of whom it is reported, that, lying on his deathbed, he should say to the standers by, That he should shortly be assured of three particulars, of which he had not been resolved all the time of his life; that is to say, Whether there were a God? Such a place as Hell? or, That the souls of men were immortal or not? A speech which hath so much of the Atheist in it, that Christian charity forbids me to give credit to it; though possibly his course of life (as to say truth, he was a man that sought his own ends more than the glory of God) might give occasion to the world to report so of him. And yet I must confess my charity is not so perfect, as not to believe the like report of Pope john the three and twentieth, who lived in safer times than this Paul the third, and might take liberty to speak whatsoever he thought, without fear of giving any advantage to an opposite party. For he indeed, as it is charged against him in the Council of Constance, was of opinion, that the Soul of man did die with his body, like that of beasts; And did not only hold it as his own opinion, but pertinaciously maintained it. Quin imo dixit pertinaciter credidit, Animam hominis cum corpore humano mori, & extingui, ad instar animalium brutorum, as the Council hath it. Some who were called Arabici in the former times, held the self same error, as Eusebius telleth us 
h Euseb. hist. Eccl. l. 6.36. , for which they were accounted for no better than Heretics, and put into the Catalogue of Heretics of St. Augustine's making 
i Aug. de haeres. c. 83. . And yet upon a Disputation which they had with Origen, they did desert their error, and recant it too; the story of which Nicephorus reports at large 
k Niceph. Eccl. hist. l. 5. c. 23. . A Pope may hold the same opinion, and pertinaciously maintain it against all Opponents, and yet we must not say that he is an Heretic, no, take heed of that: That were to trench too deep upon the privileges of St. Peter's Chair.  
But what need any proof be brought from the Word of God to prove the immortality of the Soul of man, which was a truth confessed by the very Gentiles, who saw no more than what was represented to them by the light of Nature, and the dull spectacles of Philosophy. By Plato, one of the sagest of them it was affirmed expressly and in positive terms, who useth also many Arguments in defence thereof. Which Arguments though they seem too short to some Christian writers, to come up close unto the point; yet they approve his judgement in it, confessing, that De immortalitate animae verum sentiret 
n Lactant. l. 7. c. 8. , he held the very truth in that particular. But before him Pythagoras and Pherecides did affirm the same, although Pythagoras for his part went a way by himself, touching the passing of the Soul into other Bodies, Transire animas in nova corpora, as mine Author hath it 
o Id. ibid. c. 23. . It is true, that Aristotle seemed to be doubtful of it, and problematically sometimes to dispute against it; though otherwhiles 
p Arist. de Anim.  the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, eternal and immortal, do escape his pen. Nor was it positively denied by any in the Heroic times of learning, save only by Dicearchus, Democritus 
q Lactant. l. 7. c. 8. , and the Sect of Epicures; who placing the chief happiness, or summum bonum, in corporal pleasures, were, as it were, engaged to cry down the Soul. And yet Lucretius an old Poet, and a principal stickler of that Sect, doth now and then let fall some unluckily passages, which utterly overthrow his cause. As this for one, 
Cedit item ●etro de terra quod fuit ante  
In terras, & quod missum est ex aetheris oris,  
Id rursum Coeli fulgentia templa receptant.   
Which may be briefly Englished in these two lines. 
To Earth that goes, which from the Earth was given,  
And to Jove's house, that part which came from Heaven.  In this Lucretius did agree with that of Hermes, or Mercurius, surnamed Trismegistus, who makes man to consist of two principal parts (as indeed he doth) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the one mortal, which is the body, and the other immortal, which is the soul 
r Lactant. l. 7. c. 13. . And of the same opinion was Apollo Milesius, and the Sibylline Oracles, both which are cited by Lactantius, l. 7. c. 13. and Cap. 18.20. But what need more be said in so clear a case, when Tacitus reporteth it for the general opinion of all knowing men, Cum corpore non extingui magnas animas 
s Tacit. in vi●● Agric. , That the Souls of great and gallant persons, were not extinguished with their Bodies? Were it not so, the Body were in better case than the Soul by far, and of more continuance; which doth not only remain a Body for a while, as before it was, entire and uncorrupted, after the Soul is taken from it; but by emboweling, embalming, and such helps of Art, may be preserved from putrefaction many ages together. Which Reasons and Authorities of so many Writers, and the general consent of all learned men in the times before him, prevailed so far at last on one Aristoxemus, that finding no way to decry the Souls immortality, he fell into a grosser error, Negando ullam omnino esse animam 
t Lactant. l. 7. c. 13. , denying, that there was any Soul at all, Quo nihil dici delirius potest, than which a greater dotage could not be imagined, as it is very justly censured by Lactantius. And yet as great a dotage as it seemed to him, though coming from the mouth or pen of an Heathen-man, hath been revived again in these times of Liberty, and a Book printed with the title of Man's Mortality, wherein the Author (whosoever he was) doth endeavour to prove, That the whole man, as a rational Creature, is wholly mortal, contrary to that common distinction of Soul and Body. Which if it be not the dotage of that Aristoxemus, is questionless the Heresy of the old Arabici: This Author teaching, that our immortality beginneth at the Resurrection, at the general judgement; and they, that the Soul of man dying with the Body, & de coetero ad immortalitatem transituram 
u Niceph. Eccl. hist. l. 5. c. 23. , was from thenceforth to pass into immortality. Such is the infelicity of the times we live in, that the more gross the heresy, and the more condemned by those great lights of learning in the former times, the better entertainment it is sure to find with unknowing men.  
I purpose not to make an exact discourse of the Souls immortality, but only to assert it in such a manner, as to prepare my way to the present Article, which doth in part depend upon it. For if there were no Soul at all, or if the Soul did perish, as do those of Beasts, it were in vain to think of a Resurrection, or flatter ourselves with expectation of eternal life. The immortality of the Soul is to be premised, before we speak of Heaven, and the life to come; and that premised, or granted, as I hope it will be, we must next fit it with an Ubi, with a constant place, of as great perpetuity as a soul itself; and with a life as permanent, as the place can be. Which place or life, being we cannot find it in this present world, we must look for it in another; and therefore, that which in this Creed is called Life everlasting, is called in the Nicene Creed, The life of the world to come. And if it be a Life of the world to come, this world, and all the beauties of it, must first pass away, before we can possess our estates in that; even as St. Paul hath told us of our Saviour Christ, That he took away the first Covenant to establish the second 
x Heb. 10.9. . Now that the world shall have an end, is a thing so clear in Christianity, that never any Heretic in all ages past, did call the truth hereof in question: And so it was conceived in Philosophy also, till Aristotle, and the Peripatetics which followed him, began to hammer a conceit, De aeternitate mundi, of the world's eternity. Certain I am, that all the old Philosophers before his time, and namely, Heraclitus, Empedocles, Anaxagoras, Democritus, and divers others; as also the Stoics, and the whole Sect of the Epicures (though in other things they did agree like fire and water) were all agreed upon this point, That as the world had a beginning, so it should have an end. The judgement in this case of those old Philosophers, Diogenes Laertius will afford us on an easy search: And for the said two Sects, to take one of each, Seneca telleth us for the Stoics, Unus hominum genus condet dies 
y Senec. Natur. qu. l. 3. c. 19 , That one day shall bury all mankind, and not all mankind only, but the whole frame of the Creation, (totum hunc rerum omnium contextum 
z Id. epist. 71. , as he elsewhere hath it) dies aliquis dejiciet, shall in one day be cast down and brought to end. The like Lucretius saith for the Epicureans 
a Lucret. de Nat. Rerum. c. 3. , of which Sect he was.  
Una dies dabit exitio, multosque per Annos  
Sustentata ruet moles & machina mundi.  
In English thus. 
The goodly frame and engine of this All,  
So many years upheld, shall one day fall.  Nor did they thus agree, as by joint consent, touching the Quod sit of this truth, That the world should end; but they descended to the Quomodo, or the manner of it, affirming, That it shall be consumed with fire. St. jerom doth affirm it of the Gentiles generally, that they so conceived it, (I mean still the Philosophers, or the learned Gentiles:) Quae quidem & Philosophorum mundi opinio est; omnia quae cernimus igne peritura 
b jerom. in Isa. 51. . The Stoics and the Epicureans also did agree in this, Quod mundus hic omnis ignescat; That the whole world should be burnt with fire, as Octavius telleth us in the Dialogue 
c Minut. Fel. . Eusebius not content to deal in such general terms, gives us the names of Zeno, Cleanthes, and Chrysippus, ancient Stoics all, who have so declared 
d Euseb. de Praep. Evang. sect. 15. . The like saith Cicero of Panaetius, whose fear it was, Ne ad extremum mundus ignesceret, lest the world should be consumed with fire. See to this purpose also Seneca, in his Book De Consolation ad Mart. c. 26. Pliny in his Natural History, l. 7. c. 16. The Sibylline Prophecies, lib. 2. Oracul. Lucan's Pharsal. and Ovid's Metamorph. l. 1. who doth thus express it.  
Esse quoque in fatis reminiscitur, affore tempus,  
Quo mare, quo tellus, correptaque Regia Coeli  
Ardeat, & mundi moles operosa laboret.  
Which may be Englished as followeth. 
Besides he called to mind, that by the doom  
Of certain Fate, a certain time should come,  
When Sea and Land, the Court of Heaven, the frame  
Of this great work, the world, should burn in flame.  Who can peruse these passages of those Ancient Gentiles, and not conceive they had consulted with the writings of the Prophet Isaiah 
e Isai. 51.6. , where it is said, That the Heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the Earth wax old as doth a garment; and also in another place, That the Heavens shall be rolled together like a piece of parchment 
f Id. 54.4. , that is to say, Like a Piece of Parchment shriveled and shrunk up together by a scorching fire? Who can peruse those passages of the ancient Gentiles, but must conceive that they were partly enlightened by the selfsame Spirit with which St. Peter was inspired, when he told us in his second Epistle, saying, The day of the Lord will come as a Thief in the night, in which the Heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the Elements shall melt with fervent heat, the Earth also and the works that are therein shall be utterly burnt, Cap. 4.10. And in the next save one, as followeth, Looking for, and hastening to the coming of the day of God, in which the Heavens shall perish with fire, and the Elements melt with fervent heat? Were it a thing to be admitted in Chronology, I could not but believe that these ancient Gentiles had ploughed with St. Peter's Heifer, and from him borrowed their discourses of the world's conflagration.  
And now I am fallen into the writings of those ancient Gentiles, and found what they conceived of the Souls immortality, and the consumption of this world by a burning fire: I will not leave them till they have delivered their opinions also concerning the estate of the soul departed, and the glories of eternal life in the world to come. In which they have expressed themselves in so clear a manner, that we may justly say as Octavius did, Aut nunc Christianos Philosophos esse, aut Philosophos fuisse jam tunc Christianos 
g Minut. Fe●●. , That either the Christians are Philosophers, or the old Philosophers were Christians. For that there was a Paradise, or some place of delight and pleasure for the reception of the souls of virtuous persons, appeareth by that sacred speech of Zoroaster, the ancientest of the Sages amongst the Gentiles, and one not much short of the time of Abraham, with whom he is supposed to have been contemporary, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
h Zoroast. in Oracul. Chal● , Seek Paradise, saith he; that is to say, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that all enlightened recess of souls, as Pletho the Scholiast doth expound it; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, A Choir of the divine powers encircling the Father, as Psellus glosseth on that Text; but Psellus on occasion of the words aforesaid, goes a little further. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. It concerneth us, saith he, to make haste unto the light and beams of our Heavenly Father, who hath bestowed our souls upon us, endued with such a perfect measure of understanding; and who not only doth direct our minds in the ways of godliness, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but in due time also will save our Bodies. The Divine Plato, and his followers, borrowed a great deal of their light from this Zoroaster, and the like Dictates of the rest of the Chaldean Sages, which grounded him in his opinion of the Souls immortality, and the account it was to give to the dreadful judge in the world to come, whereof he speaketh in his second Epistle, and eleventh Book De Legibus. Pythagoras, though sometimes he held the transmigration of the soul into other Bodies, yet in his better thoughts he disposed it otherwise, and placed the souls of virtuous men in the Heavens above, where they should be immortal, and like the gods, saying 
i Pythag. in Carm. Aureis. , 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.   
That is to say, 
Leaving the Body, they to Heaven shall fly,  
Where they shall be immortal, never die.  And to this purpose also that of Epicharmus may be here alleged, assuring us▪ That if we live a life conform to the rules of virtue, death shall not be able to do us hurt, because our souls shall live in a blessed life in the highest Heavens. Upon these grounds, but specially upon the reading of some Books of Plato, Cleombrotus is said to have been so ravished with the contemplation of the glories of that other life, that for the more speedy attaining of them, he cast himself down from the top of a Mountain, with greater zeal by far, than wisdom. And therefore much more commendable was the death, and dying speech of one Chalcedius (another of those old Platonics) Revertar in patriam ubi meliores Progenitores & Parents 
k De ver. Chr. Rel. c. 15. , I am, saith he, returning into my own Country, where I shall find the bettet sort of my Progenitors and deceased Parents. Nor was this such a point of divine knowledge, as was attainable only by the wise men of Greece; the sober men amongst the Romans had attained it also. For Cicero affirms expressly, Certum esse ac definitum in coelo locum, ubi beati aevo sempiterno fruantur 
l Cicero in Som. Scipion. , That there is a certain and determinate place in Heaven where the blessed souls of those who deserve well of the public shall enjoy everlasting rest and happiness. And Seneca speaks thus of death, intermittit vitam non eripit, that it only interrupteth the course of life, but destroyeth it not 
m Senec. ad Lucil. , because there will come a day at last, qui nos iterum in lucem reponat, which will restore us again to the light of Heaven. Finally, Not to add more testimonies in so clear a case, Homer makes Hercules a companion of the gods above, with whom he lives in endless solace, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And Ennius saith the like of Romulus 
n Cicero Tuscul. qu. l. 2. , Romulus in Coelo longum cum diis agit aevum. If we would know what their opinion was of the place itself, in which eternal life was to be enjoyed, we have a glimpse or shadow of it in the fiction of the Elysian fields so memorised and chanted by the ancient Poets; Locos laetos & amoena vireta Fortunatorum nemorum, sedesque beatas 
o Virg. Aen. l. 6. ; A place conceived to be replenished with all variety of pleasures and divine contentments, which possibly the soul of man could aspire unto: the ground continually covered with the choicest Tapestry of Nature, the Trees perpetually furnished with the richest fruits, excellent both for taste and colour, the Rivers running Nectar, and most heavenly Wines, fit for the palate of the gods; And which did add to all these beauties, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the sweets thereof not blasted by untimely dews, or interrupted by the inclemency of a bitter winter. A place by them designed for the souls of those who had been careful of Religion, or lost their lives in the defence and preservation of their natural Country, or otherwise deserved nobly of the public. Nay, even the rude Americans and savage Indians, whom we may justly call jumenta rationalia, a kind of reasonable beasts, retain amongst them a Tradition, that beyond some certain hills (but they know not where) there is a glorious place reserved for the souls of those who had lived virtuously and justly in this present life, or sacrificed their lives to defend their Country, or were the Authors of any notable and signal benefit which tended to the good of mankind.  
If then not only the Philosophers and learned Gentiles, but even the Barbarians and rude Americans have spooken so divinely of the place and state of good men departed; there is no question to be made, but that the Patriarches, Prophets, and other holy men of God, were very well assured of the truth hereof, although they lived before or under the Law, as well assured as we that have the happiness to live under the Gospel. For St. Paul telleth us of the Fathers which were under the cloud 
p 1 Cor. 10.1, 2, 3. , that they all passed thorough the red Sea, and did all eat the same spiritual meat, and did all drink the same spiritual drink (for they drank of that spiritual Rock which followed them, and that Rock was Christ) Not that they had the same Sacraments in specie, which we Cristians have; but others which conduced to the same effect, and did produce the same fruits both of Faith and Piety. The Mysteries of salvation, the hopes and promises of eternal life, are frequently expressed in the Old Testament, quamvis obscuriores longè, though more obscure by far than in the forms of speech in which they are presented to us in the New Testament, as Peter Martyr well observes 
q Pet. Mart. in loc. come. l. 2. c. 16. . And he notes too, that many were the temporal promises, or the promises concerning temporal blessings; but so, as to conduct and train them up in the hopes of happiness eternal: The temporal blessings which they had, were but the types and figures of those endless comforts which were reserved for them in the Heavens above; the land of Promise, but a shadow of that promised land, of which they were to be heirs in the Kingdom of God: Jerusalem but a Map of that glorious City, whose Author and founder is the Lord. Enoch had neither been translated before the Law, nor Elias under it, had not both of them steadfastly believed this truth, that they should see the goodness of the Lord in the Land of the living. And yet some men there were, and I doubt still are, who teach, that the holy men of God which lived before Christ our Saviour's time, did fix their hopes only upon temporal blessings, and not at all upon spiritual, or if upon spiritual, as the peace of conscience, yet not upon eternal happiness, which is the crown and glory of that peace. The Anabaptists and the Familists were of this opinion, against whom the Church of England hath declared herself in the Seventh Article of her Confession; saying, That they are not to be heard which feign that the old Fathers did only look for transitory promises. Of this opinion also was that wretched Servetus, who thought no otherwise of the people of the house of Israel, quam de aliquo porcorum grege 
z Calv. Instit. l. 2. c. 10. sect. 1. , than other men would do of an herd of Swine, whom he conceived the Lord did fatten in the Land of Canaan, Citra ullam spem coelestis immortalitatis, Without breeding them in any hopes of the life eternal. And against him doth Calvin (who hath given us this knowledge of him) intent his whole tenth Chapter of his second Book of Institutions. Nor do I find but that our Masters in the Church of Rome like it well enough, though they keep more aloof in the tendrie of it. For neither doth Prateolus, nor Alphonsus à Castro, nor any other of their Writers for aught I can find, in reckoning up the errors of the Anabaptists, or of Servetus and his followers, account this for one; nor do they give such efficacy to the jewish Sacraments, as to confer Grace, or spiritual gifts on them that were partakers of them. And Harding telleth us in plain terms, That the body is not raised to eternal life, but by the real and substantial eating of the flesh of Christ 
a Answ. to the Apol. par. 2. c. . Which were it so, as Bishop jewel well observeth, what life could Abraham, Isaac, and jacob, and other holy Patriarches and Prophets have, which were before the coming of Christ, and therefore could not really and substantially eat his flesh? Must we not needs conclude by this strange Divinity, that they have no life, but are dead for ever, without any hope of resurrection unto Life everlasting, But what need such deductions, though most clear and evident, when one of their infallible and Authentic Records speaks it out so plainly, that every ordinary understanding cannot but perceive it? I mean the Roman Catechism published by the order and authority of the Council of Trent. The Authors whereof abusing the authority of St. Augustine in his Comment on the 77th. Psalms, will have the jewish Church to be called the Synagogue, Quia pecudum more quibus magis congregari convenit, terrena tantum & caduca bona spectarent 
b Catech. Rom. in exp. Symb. ; i. e. Because like brute beasts who properly are said to be congregated or gathered together (for so the word Synagogue doth import) they sought after nothing but transitory and temporal things. Than which no Anabaptist in the world could have spoke more plainly. A Tenet very contrary to plain Texts of Scripture, which speak no otherwise of the Patriarches, Prophets and other holy men of God, which lived before and under the Law, than of those to whom pertained the adoption of Sons, and the glory, and the service of God 
c Rom. 9.4. , and the same Promises which are made to us who live under the Gospel. For doth not God say to our Father Abraham, that he was both his shield, and his great reward 
d Gen. 15.1. ? his shield, or his Protector, as the Vulgar reads it, to save him from all danger in this present world; and his exceeding great reward in the world to come. And doth not job, whose history was writ by the hand of Moses (as it is generally conceived by men of learning) profess a more than ordinary confidence in the Resurrection 
e Job 19.26. , and of his seeing God with those very eyes, which were to be consumed with worms? Doth not the Royal Psalmist tell us of himself, that he did verily believe to see the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living 
f Psalm. 27. 1●. ? And doth not the Prophet tell us of the blessed Land where men live for ever, that the eye hath not seen, nor the ear heard, neither can the heart of man conceive those things which God hath prepared for them that love him? Sufficient evidence to prove, that as well in the Old Testament as in the New, Everlasting Life is offered to mankind by God, according to the Doctrine of this Church of England 
g Article 7. .  
It is true, the Promises of Everlasting Life to us which live under the Gospel, are delivered in more clear expressions than those which were delivered to our Fathers which lived under the Law; for which we have the greater cause to give thanks to God, who speaks so plainly to us without Tropes and Figures, without Types and Ceremonies, the shadows of those things which we have in substance. For what can be more plain than that of our Lord and Saviour, saying, That the righteous shall go into life everlasting, Matth. 25.46. That they which do forsake all for his sake, shall in the world to come have eternal life, Mark 10.30. That whosoever believeth in the only begotten Son of God, shall not perish, but have life everlasting, John 3.6. That he which hateth his life in this world, shall keep it unto life eternal? Chap. 12.25. Or what can be more plain than those words of St. Paul in the first to Timothy, advising us, That we lay up in store for ourselves a good foundation against the time to come, that we may lay hold on eternal life, Chap. 6.19. Or those to Titus, That being justified by his grace, we shall be made heirs according to the hopes of life eternal, Chap. 3.7. Or that in the second to the Corinthians, We know that if our earthly tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the Heavens? Chap. 5.1. Finally, What can be more plain than that of St. Peter, assuring us, That by the Resurrection of Christ from the dead, we are begotten again to an inheritance immortal, undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved for us in the Heavens? 1 Pet. 5.3, 4. Or that in the same Epistle, where he telleth his Presbyters, That if they feed the flock of Christ committed to them, when the chief Shepherd shall appear, they shall receive, immarcessibilem coronam gloriae, an immarcessible Crown of glory, or a Crown of glory which withereth not, as our English reads it? Chap. 5.4. How much more might be added from the Revelations, and other passages of the New Testament, where the same thing is either figuratively expressed, or easily inferred by logical and necessary consequences? but that I was to show that eternal life was promised unto those who lived under the Law, although not every where, nor altogether in such clear expressions, as it is held forth unto us who live under the Gospel. As clear are those expressions also, which do set forth the nature and condition of this life to come, as those which do deliver the eternity and duration of it: For in some places it is called the joy of the Lord, Enter into thy master's joy, Matth. 25.5. Where there is fullness of joy, and at his right hand there is pleasure for evermore 
h Psal. 16.12. , as the Psalmist hath it; Et nunquam turbata quies, & gaudia firma, in the Poet's language. Sometimes it is called a Kingdom, and a Crown of glory. A Kingdom by our Saviour in St. Matthews Gospel, Chap. 25.5. A Crown of glory by St. Paul; as also a Crown of righteousness, 2 Tim. 4.8. and finally, a Crown of life by St. james, Chap. 1.12. With one of which Crowns, or some like unto it, we shall be all made Kings in Gods heavenly Kingdom, as is affirmed by St. john in the Revelation 
Apoc. 4.4. . In a word, it is sometimes called Civitas Dei viventis, or the City of the living God, as in that to the Hebrews, Chap. 12.5. A City, by St. john described to be of pure Gold, and as clear as Crystal, the Walls of jaspar stone, and the Gates of Pearl 
k Apoc. 21.18 Vers. 19 , and all the Pavements throughout of most precious stones. Which Character we must not understand in the literal, but the mystical sense: The Man of God in his description of the New jerusalem, selecting such materials to set forth the same, as he conceived to be most estimable in the eyes of men. Put all which hath been said together, and we shall find, That under this one notion of Life Everlasting, are comprehended all the comforts which attend the same; that is to say, A Kingdom, and a Crown of glory, the joys and never-fading pleasures which are to be possessed at the right hand of God in that Heavenly City, the very Gates whereof are so rich and beautiful. O coelo dilecta domus, postesque beati! A City where we shall possess all divine contentments which possibly the soul of man can aspire unto; health without sickness, beauty without blemish, felicity without admixture of afflictions, and joy without disconsolation: There shall we for evermore enjoy the Beatifical Vision of Almighty God, when we shall see him face to face, in his perfect glory, and know him as we are known of him 
l 1 Cor. 13.12. , not by faith but sight; which is the only object of divine felicity, Visio Dei beatifica sola est summum bonum nostrum 
m August. de Trinit. , said St. Augustine truly. And in that blessed Vision of Almighty God, we shall with joy possess those unspeakable glories, which St. Paul calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
n 2 Cor. 12.4. , Such as it was not possible for a man to utter; which neither the tongue of man nor angels can express aright. To which, what need we add the happiness which we shall enjoy, in having the society of the glorious company of the Apostles, the goodly fellowship of the Prophets, the noble army of Martyrs, the beloved embraces of those happy souls, whose sad departure from us we so much lamented. What need it be added unto this, That there we shall enjoy those favours which the frown of Princes cannot ruin, nor the riot of posterity impair, nor the tongues of evil people blemish; those riches which the rust of pleasure shall not eat into, nor the moth of vanity consume, nor the great thief of Hell steal from us? In a word, What need be added unto this, That there we shall attain such an height of bliss, Vt ne voto quidem opus sit, that there shall be no need of prayers, but we shall spend our whole eternity in no other office, than singing Hymns of praise and glory to the Lord our God? All this, and more than can be added, is comprehended in the glory of that blessed Vision, which is all in all. But of the glories and felicities of eternal life, it is enough to say a little, because it is impossible we should say enough.  
Two things there are which may deserve a further, and more punctual search, because they have been much debated amongst the learned: The one about the different degrees in eternal happiness; the other about the knowledge which the Saints shall have of one another, whether they lived with us, or in other ages. Of both these I shall venture a word or two in a positive way, rather than traverse and debate them in the way of Argument.  
And first beginning with the last, It is apparent that the Apostles knew our Saviour after his Resurrection from the grave of death; and that the people of jerusalem, the holy City, did know those Saints, who rose together with our Saviour, and appeared unto them; though both our Saviour, and those Saints rose in glorified bodies; Bodies not subject any more unto putrefaction. And if a mortal eye could see and distinguish clearly of such bodies, as by their Resurrection were become incorruptible; how much more may we think that a glorified eye is able to recall unto our remembrance, the knowledge of that glorified body, which formerly we knew in the state of corruption. It is apparent also by our Saviour's Parable, that Dives and Lazarus knew each other, though then in divers places, and in different states 
a Luke 16. ●3▪ ; the one at rest in Abraham's bosom, the other in the pit of Hell, and in flames unquenchable. How much more shall the Saints, the Elect of God, both know, and be made known unto one another; abiding in the same place, and the same estate, and looking daily in the Mirror of God's blessed Vision, which represents all things unto them in their true condition? We shall then know, as we are known of God, as St. Paul hath told us 
b 1 Cor 3.12. ; out of which place, St. Augustine comforted a poor widow, called Italica, who mourned heavily for the loss of her husband, assuring her, That as in this life she saw him with external eyes, but with those eyes discerned no more than his outward lineaments; so in the life to come she should see him again, and in that sight discern the very thoughts of his heart, and all his secret counsels, and imaginations 
c August. Epl. 6. . Nor shall we only know and be known of those, with whom we took sweet counsel together, or walked together in the House of the Lord as Friends; but at the first sight shall be able to say, that this is Abraham, Isaac, jacob; these are the Saints that went before us, these are they who came in the arrere many ages after. For Christ our Saviour tells the jews, That they should see Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and all the Prophets in the Kingdom of God 
d Luke 13.28. : Not see them, as men see a stranger whom they did not know, but see them so, as to know who they were by their names and qualities; Else could not the discomfort be so great unto them, to see their Fathers after the flesh, and all the Prophets whom they murdered, in a state of glory; and they, their miserable and unhappy children, to be quite excluded from the same. And the same Christ our Saviour doth assure his followers, That they should sit at the same Table with Abraham, Isaac, and jacob, in the Kingdom of Heaven 
e Id. 22.30. ; that is to say, They should commerce as freely, and as knowingly with those ancient Patriarches, as men that use to eat together in the selfsame house. Besides, the Scriptures do affirm in several places, That at the last day, shall be a manifest declaration of the just judgement of God, when he shall reward every man according to the works which he hath done in the flesh, whether good or evil. And if the works of every man shall be brought to light, then much more shall the workers of those iniquities be made known to the Saints their Judges; for if the persons be not known, where would be that confusion of the face which the Scriptures speak of, which shall befall the wicked and impenitent sinner, upon the manifestation of his deeds of darkness? Many a malefactor hath been hanged more cheerfully in places where we was not known, where he could be no shame to his friends and kindred, than if he had been executed in the sight of those who knew him, and the parentage whence he came. And to this purpose are the words of our blessed Saviour unto his Apostles, when he informeth them, That they should sit upon twelve seats, judging the twelve Tribes of Israel 
f Matth. 19.28. . By which it is apparent that they shall be known by the Tribes of Israel, to be the poor despised Apostles of a more despised and persecuted Saviour. It followeth consequently upon good deduction, not only that the twelve Apostles shall know those of the Tribes of Israel, whom they are to judge; but that they shall be also known of one another, and of all the Saints, who shall rejoice in that preferment of their Chiefs and Leaders, though raised unto an higher pitch and degree of glory, than others of their Brethren are advanced unto.  
For that in Heaven there shall be different degrees and estates of glory, I take to be a point so clearly evidenced in holy Scripture, that little disputation needs be raised about it: Though some too much affected to a parity in this present life, expect to find it also in the life to come. The Fathers, I am sure, did all look this way. And so much Peter Martyr doth confess ingenuously, although himself no friend unto their opinion. De Patribus fatemur ingenuè quod praemiorum discrimina statuerunt, which is plain enough 
g Pet. Martyr. Com. Loc. cl. 3. c. 17. . And as he doth affirm this of the Fathers generally, so he affirms particularly of St. jerom, that he was istarum differentiarum acer propugnator; a great assertor of those different degrees and estates of glory, as indeed he was. And certainly they had good warrant to resolve so in it. Daniel, a Prophet of the Lord, and one in more than ordinary favour with him, hath assured us this, That they which be wise, shall shine like the brightness of the firmament, and they which turn many unto righteousness like the Stars for ever 
h Dan. 12.3. . In which we see two different duties recommended to us, to learn the rules of wisdom first, to be wise ourselves, and then to teach them unto others, to turn them to righteousness; accordingly the rewards proportioned, to shine like the brightness of the firmament, like the stars of Heaven. And who seeth not how much the splendour of the Stars exceeds the brightness of the Sky, of the clearest Firmament? The like St. Paul hath told us of the Resurrection, That there shall be a difference in it; that there is one glory of the Sun, another glory of the Moon, another glory of the Stars; and of the Stars, that one Star differeth from another Star in glory 
i 1 Cor. 15.41. . Now our Astronomy doth teach us upon very good inferences, that the Sun is One hundred sixty and six times bigger than the Earthly Globe, whereas the Moon hardly amounts unto a fortieth part thereof; and that the fixed Stars of the first magnitude, are found to be One hundred and seven times bigger than the Body of the Earth, those of the least, coming but to the sixth part of that proportion. Which showeth the difference in glory to be very great, though possibly the Rules of that Art may fail us in the proportioning of that difference: But whatsoever be the error in those Rules of Art, assuredly there can be no etror in the words of Christ, in whom the Prophets and Apostles do concentre and meet together. And he hath told us in plain terms, That in his Father's house there are many mansions 
John 14.2. ; that is to say, as Denys the Carthusian states it, conform unto the mind and meaning of the ancient Fathers, Multi praemiorum gradus, & variae distinctiones, many degrees of happiness and estates of glory, though all most glorious in themselves. According to which Rule of our Lord and Saviour, we find a difference made in his holy Gospel, between those men which had been faithful over much, and those which had been faithful over a little only 
l Matth. 25.21, 23. ; the one being made the Ruler of Ten Cities, the other but of Five alone 
m Luke 19.17, 19 ; between the recompense and reward of a righteous person, and that which is laid up by God for the reward of a Prophet. He that receiveth a righteous man, in the name of a righteous man, shall receive a righteoas man's reward. And he that receiveth a Prophet in the name of a Prophet, shall receive a Prophet's reward 
p Matth. 10.41. , saith our Lord and Saviour. And to say truth, besides the warrant and authority of the holy Scriptures, that so it should be, it stands with very good Reason that so it should be; and is most consonant to the Rules of distributive justice, that so it must be. For if that faith in Christ, and a conformity to the words of his holy Gospel, be, in the merciful construction of the Lord our God, thought worthy of a crown of glory; then certainly a greater and more lively faith, and a more conscionable walking in the sight of God, must be rewarded with a richer and more excellent Crown. And so it also followeth by the rule of contraries. For if he that knoweth the will of his Master and doth it not, shall be beaten with more stripes 
q Luk. 12.47. , than the ignorant man, as the truth itself hath said he shall; it must needs follow by that Rule, that they which know Gods will exactly, and conscionably apply themselves to observe the same, shall be rewarded with more blessings at their Master's hands. And so the old Carthusian whom before I spoke of, doth resolve the question. Many (saith he) are raised above their brethren in the house of God, Secundum quod aliqui ferventius Deum dilexerint 
r Dion. Carthus. in Joh. 14. , as being far more zealous in their love to God, more constant in pursuit of their way to Heaven, than others of their Brethren are, which yet by God's great mercy shall come thither also. As therefore the Apostle advised those of Corinth, so must I also counsel those which shall read these papers, that they do covet earnestly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the best gifts and graces 
s 1 Cor. , that so they may possess the most eminent places. Or if they dare not look so high, to be sure of this, that they do so conform their lives unto God's commandments, that when their earthly Tabernacles are dissolved into dust and ashes, their souls may be disposed of in the place of rest, there to expect the Resurrection of their bodies to Eternal life, and lodged for ever in some one of those heavenly Mansions reserved for them in the Heavens.  
And this indeed is that which we all must aim at, if we have any of that zeal to the Kingdom of Heaven, which was so eminent in the Patriaches, Apostles, Martyrs, Confessors, as to be left upon record for our instruction. Of Abraham it is written in the Book of God, that he left his own Country, and all his kindred, in search of a far better Country, that is an Heavenly 
t Hebr. 11. ; that he left Vr, one of the chief Cities of the Chaldeans, but one made with hands, to look for an house not made with hands, whose builder and maker is the Lord. David preferred one day in the house of God, before a Thousand years consumed in his earthly Palaces 
u Psal. 84.10. , yea, though he were advanced no higher in that House of God, than to be a doorkeeper. St. Peter was so rapt with the sight of those Heavenly glories, in which he did behold our Saviour in his transfiguration, that he set up his resolution with Bonum est nobis esse hic 
x Matth. 17.4. , that it was best for him to abide there always. And when St. Paul had seen a glimpse of the joys of Paradise, to which he had been taken up in an heavenly rapture, how willingly did he endure the cross, and despise the shame, in reference to the joy which was set before him 
y Hebr. 12.2. ? how earnestly did he come out with his cupio dissolvi, that he desired to be dissolved and to live with Christ? With what a gallant zeal did the old Father Ignatius contemn the fire, Gallows, fury of wild Beasts, the breaking of his bones, quartering of his members, and the crushing of his body into pieces, tota Diaboli tormenta, nay all the torments of the Devil and Hell, only upon this bare hope, ut Christo fruar 
z Hierom. in Catal. Script. , That he might come at last to enjoy his Saviour? Such an Heroic zeal was that of the good Father St. Augustine, who declared himself to be contended to endure the torments of Hell, so he might thereby gain the joys of Heaven 
a Aug. Serm. 31. de sancti. , rather than lose the same for want of those dreadful sufferings. And not much short of this was the resolution wherewith St. Basil answered his Persecutors, when they did think to terrify him with the fear of death; I will not fear that death, saith he, which can do no more than restore me unto him that made me 
b Nazan. de vit. Basil. . Infinite more of these examples might be laid before us, were not these sufficient to let us see how high a price they set on the joys of Heaven, the glories of this Life eternal, of which they had no more assurance than what was made unto them by the Word of God; which Word of God we have for our assurance and comfort also, besides the conduct and authority of their good example. Of such inestimable nature are the glories of Eternal Life, which are prepared by God for all them that love him, and carefully pursue those ways which do lead them thither.  
But so it is not with those men, who either wilfully shut their eyes against the knowledge of God, or, who confess him with their mouths, but scornfully deny him in their words and actions, leading a life conform to their sensual appetite. There is another habitation reserved for them, even that prepared for the devil and his angels 
a Matth. 25.41. , the house of everlasting torments and unquenchable flames. The knowledge and belief of which doleful state, pertains no less unto a Christian, than that of everlasting life in eternal glory. The wicked and impenitent soul being again united to her sinful body, shall find an everlasting life, but in endless torments. Which though it be not said expressly in the Apostles Creed, is yet contained by consequence, and in the way of reduction, in the present Article; but more particularly and in terminis expressed in the Creed or Symbol of St. Athanasius. There it is said to be necessary to everlasting salvation, to believe this, amongst other things of our Lord and Saviour JESUS CHRIST, That at his coming unto judgement all men shall rise again with their bodies, and shall give account for their own works; and they that have done good shall go into life everlasting, and they that have done evil into everlasting fire 
b Quincunque vult. . Which is no more than what our Saviour Christ hath told us, though in other words (and every word of his is to be believed) where it is said, That the hour is coming, in which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice 
c Joh. 5.28, 29. : And shall come forth, they that have done good to the Resurrection of life, and they that have done evil to the Resurrection of damnation. Being therefore in this place to speak of the pains of Hell, and such considerable circumstances as conduce to the knowledge of them; I will begin first with the Quid nominis, the names by which it is made known in the writings of the Evangelists and Apostles, and other creditable Authors in the Christian Church, and so descend to the Quid rei, or the thing itself.  
First then the names by which it hath been delivered and made known unto us by the sacred Penmen, are these four especially, that is to say, Hades, Abyssus, Tartarus, and Gehenna; of which, the three first are merely Greek, and the last an offspring of the Hebrews. Of Hades we have spoke already in the Article of Christ's descent into Hell; as also of the Latin Inferi or infernum, which they use to express it, and shall not here repeat what was there delivered. By that which was delivered there, it appears to be a dark and disconsolate place in the deeps of the Earth, a place appointed for the punishment of ungodly men; not only in the judgement of the sacred Penmen, and the old Ecclesiastical writers in the Church of Christ, but also of all learned men amongst the Gentiles, whether Greeks or Latins. The same is signified as plainly in the name of Abyssus, which is thrice used by St. john in the Revelation, to signify the bottomless pit, or the pit of torments: from whence the smoke ascended like the smoke of a furnace, Chap. 9.2. from whence the Beasts ascended to make war against the Two Witnesses of the Lord, Chap. 11.7. from whence that Beast ascended also to his just perdition, on which the woman sat, which made herself drunk with the blood of the Saints, Chap. 17.8. And is indeed no other than that Stagnum ignis & sulphuris, that lake of fire and brimstone, mentioned in the twentieth Chapter. Nor is the word used only in the Revelation, to signify Hell, or the place of torments, but in St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans also, where it is said, Say not in thine heart, who shall ascend up into Heaven? That is, to bring Christ down from above 
d Rom. 10.6, 7. . Aut quis descendet in Abyssum, or, who shall descend into the deep? That is, to bring up Christ again from the dead. Where, by Abyssus, which is rendered by this word, the deep, is meant no other place but Hell, Inferi or infernum, as saith Martin Bucer, by whom the whole Text is expounded of Christ's descent into Hell, as hath been proved at large in the foresaid Article. This finally is the very place, to which the Devils who exclaimed against Christ our Saviour for coming to torment them before their time 
e Matth. 8.29. , desired him that they might not go. And they besought him (saith St. Luke) ne imperaret illis ut in Abyssum irent, i. e. That he would not command them to go into the deep 
f Luk. 8.31. , or rather into the Abyss, or the bottomless pit, as the word is rendered thrice in the Revelation. Abyssus therefore must be Hell, or the house of torments prepared for the Devil and his Angels, against the judgement of that great and terrible day; which they were so afraid to enter, that they besought the Lord not to send them thither. The third word used for Hell in the holy Scripture is Tartarus, used only by St. Peter, and that but once. God spared not (saith he) the Angels that sinned, but having bound them with chains of darkness, detrusos in Tartaro tradidit cruciandos 
g 2 Pet. 2.4. , cast them down into Hell, to be kept there to the day of judgement. Where Tartarus, though Englished Hell, is not that very place of torment to which they shall be doomed in the judgement day; but the out-skirts or suburbs of it, the prison in the which they lie bound in the chains of darkness. But whether it be Hell itself, or the dungeon to it, the ancient Gentiles who best knew the true meaning of it, have made it a dark place in the deeps of the Earth; and therefore called by Ovid, Tenebrosa Tartara 
h Ovid. Met. l. 1. . Thus Hesiod also telleth us of it, that the dungeon of Tartarus is as much under the Earth, as Heaven is above it; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
i Hesiod. in Theogonia. , as his words there are. And so did Virgil understand it when he told us this, Tartarus ipse bis patet in praeceps tantum, That Tartarus is twice as deep as the Heaven is high. And in a prophecy of one of the Sibyls, which I find often cited by the ancient Fathers 
k Lactant. l. ●. August. de Civitat. Dei. l. 1●. c. 23. , it is described to be a place in the lower parts of the Earth. For speaking of the day of judgement, it is there affirmed, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, That then the gaping Earth shall discover the Tartarean dungeon. That they did also use the word for the place of torments, is evident by that of Anacreon, an old drunken Poet, who giveth this reason why he was so loath to die, and forsake this world, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Because he feared to go to Tartarus: And so St. Augustine understood it, when he said of Christ, That he descended unto Tartarus, but felt there no torments. The fourth and last word was Gehenna, or Ge-Hinnom, a word not known amongst the Gentiles, and only used by Christ when he spoke to the jews, whose it was originally; and by St. james in his Epistle to that scattered Nation 
l Jam. 2.6. , who very well understood the true meaning of it. For Ge-Hinnom or the Valley of Hinnom, was a Dell or Valley near jerusalem, in which there was a fire continually burning, partly to consume the dead Carcases and filth of the City, and partly for the sacrificing of those wretched Children which were offered to the Idol Moloch: Which making it a place both of stink and terror, it came to be a type of Hell-fire itself; and for the fire of Hell, or for Hell itself, was used by Christ and his Apostle, as before was said; the Hebrew word being mollified and made Gehenna. Hell is called many times Gehinnon, saith Peter Martyr 
m Pet. Martyr. Com. Loc. clas. 3. c. 16. , because a Vale being a low and deep place, doth resemble Hell; Quod infra terram esse creditur, which generally is believed to be under the Earth. A place of fiery torments, saith Martin Bucer; and therefore called Gehenna ignis, or the Hell of fire, in St. Matthews Gospel 
n Matth. 5.22. .  
These are the several words used by the sacred Penmen of the New Testament, when they speak of Hell. And all being laid together, will amount to this, That it is a dark and dismal place in the deeps of the Earth, prepared by God originally for the devil and his angels, and secondarily for impenitent sinners, where they shall fry for ever in unquenchable flames, and see no other light but the fire that burns them. And this being properly the punishment reserved in Hell, for those who are condemned to that bottomless pit, I shall insist the more upon it: Not looking here upon the separation of the wicked from the love of God, or the despair which they groan under, or the guilt of conscience; which either are but poena damni, the loss of that which Gods beloved do enjoy in the Heavenly glories, or are in part inflicted on the wicked man in this present life. For unto this relates those Parables in St. Matthews Gospel, where it is said by Christ, That the Angels shall gather out of his Kingdom all things that offend, and them that do iniquity, and shall cast them in caminum ignis into the furnace of fire 
o Matth. 13 42, 50. . And in the Parable of the Net, we have it in the same words, in caminum ignis. Thus the rich glutton in St. Luke is said to be tormented in those fiery flames 
p Luke 16.24. : And in the twentieth of the Revelation it is called expressly, Stagnum ignis & sulphuris, A lake of fire and brimstone 
q Apoc. 20.10. , as was said before. A truth communicated to, and by the Prophets of the former times, who give us this description of Tophet, or the Valley of Hinnom, That the pile thereof is fire and much wood, that the breath of the Lord is like a stream of brimstone to kindle it 
r Isai. 30.33 & 34.10. ; and that the stream thereof shall be turned into pitch, and the dust into brimstone. And Malachi speaking of the day of judgement, telleth us, That it shall burn like an Oven, and that all which do wickedly shall be as the stubble, Quos inflammabit dies veniens, whom that day when it cometh shall burn up 
s Mal. 4.1. . A truth so known among the Gentiles, whether by tradition of their Ancestors, or conversation with the jews, we dispute not here, that by the verses of the Poets, and the works of their most grave Philosophers, as Minutius telleth us, Illius ignei fluminis admonen●ur homines, Men were admonished to beware of that burning lake. To which it were impertinent to add the testimonies of the Ancient Fathers, by one of which it is called Divinus ignis 
t Lactant. l. 7. c. 21. , Poenale incendium 
u Minut. Fel. in Dial.  by a second, Ardour poenarum by a third 
x August. de Civit. Dei. l. 21. c. 2, 3. , Aeternus ignis, by a fourth, & sic de coeteris. And though a Question hath been made (as all things have been questioned in these captious times) whether this fire be true and real, or only metaphorically called so in the Book of God; yet by all sound Interpreters it is thus agreed on (as hath been very well observed by a learned jesuit) Metaphoram esse non posse quae sit tam perpetua 
y Maldonat. in Marc. 9 , That such a constancy of expression doth exclude a Metaphor. Nor do there want good Reasons to confirm this truth, against the cavils and exceptions of unquiet men.  
For first, considering that the fire of Hell is so often threatened in the Scriptures to ungodly men, unless we hold fast to this good old Rule in expounding Scripture, to take it in the literal sense, according as the native meaning of the words import, but where the same may be against the truth of faith, and honesty of manners (it is St. Augustine's Rule 
z De Doctr. Christ. l. 3. c. 10. ) we shall leave nothing safe nor sound in the Book of God. And then it is to be considered, That Christ our Saviour shall pronounce this sentence in the day judgement, Depart from me ye cursed into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels; Which if it be not spoken in the literal sense, according to the plain meaning of the words, neither the guilty can perceive what they are to suffer, nor the Ministers what they are to execute, nor the Saints what belongs to them to approve and applaud; but all things will be left in most strange perplexities. Besides, it was the custom of our Lord and Saviour, when he had spoken to the jews in Tropes and Parables, to make an exposition of them to his own Disciples; and in that exposition to speak so plainly, that every one might be able to understand him: As in the Parables of the Tares, and the Casting Net, delivered in the thirteenth of St. Matthews Gospel, the Disciples understood not what he meant by either, but were as ignorant of his scope and purpose, as the rest of the jews; But when he did expound himself unto them in private, touching the sending of his Angels in the day of judgement to sever the wicked from the just, and to cast them, being severed so, into the furnace of fire; and then demanded, if they understood what was said unto them, they made answer, yea 
a Matth. 13.51. . It must not therefore be a Metaphor, but a proper Speech, by which our Saviour Christ did expound his meaning, and open the obscurity of the said two Parables; for to expound a Parable by a Trope or Metaphor, had neither been agreeable to our Saviour's goodness, nor any way conducing to their Edification.  
So then, the fire of Hell shall be true and real, not Figurative and Metaphorical; and as it is a real fire, a devouring fire, so is it ignis inextinguibilis, an unquenchable fire in the third, and ignis aeternus, an everlasting fire, in the five and twentieth of Matthew; The smoke whereof goeth up for ever, saith the Prophet Isaiah 
b Isai. 34.10. . A fire which feedeth both on the body and the soul, yet shall never consume them; and such a fire, as breeds a kind of worm within it, which shall never die, but always gnaw upon the conscience of the man condemned, and create far more anguish to him, than all bodily torments. And of this worm it is which St. Basil speaketh, where reckoning up the terrors which shall be presented to the wicked in the day of judgement, amongst them he recounteth a darkish fire, which though it hath lost his light, shall retain its burning, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
c Basil in Psal. 33. , and a most venomous kind of worm feeding on flesh, and raising intolerable torments with continual biting. See to this purpose also that of Gregory Nyssen in his Homily De Resurrectione Christi; nor is it thus delivered in the writings of the Christians only. josephus also hath the like, a jew, but a learned and a modest jew, in an Oration of his which he made to the Grecians; not extant in his works indeed, but mentioned by Damascene, and preserved by Zonaras 
d Zonar. Annal. Tom. 1. f. 1●1. : For speaking also his opinion of the final judgement, to be executed by the Messiah in the last day, he saith, That there remaineth for the lovers of wickedness, an unquenchable and never ending fire, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. And a fiery worm not dying, nor destroying the body, but breaking forth of the body with unceasing anguish. And to this truth, as to the miserable state of those in Hell, all the old Catholic Doctors do attest unanimously, whether Greeks or Latins. Tatianus, one of the most ancientest of the Grecian Doctors, calleth the estate of the damned in Hell, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a death which never dieth, an immortal misery 
e Tatian. O●a. adv. Gentes. : Tertullian, the most ancient Latin, Cruciatum non diuturnum sed sempiternum, Not only a long and lingering torrant, but an everlasting one. St. Augustine answerably unto that of Tatianus, doth call it Mortem sine morte 
f August. de Civit. Dei. l. 21. c. 2, 3. , adding more over of those sires, Punire non finire corpora, that they torment the body, but destroy it not. Tertullian he goeth further yet, saith, That it burns the body, but repairs it also 
g Tertul. Apol. c. 48. , and calls it poenam nutrientem, A fire which so devoureth, that it also nourisheth. With him Lactantius doth consent 
h Lactant. l. 7. c. 21. , so also doth Minutius Felix, Prudentius, Cassiodorus, and indeed who not? And why should this be thought a wonder so far beyond the reason and belief of a mere natural man; or such, who taking on themselves the names of Christians, will yet believe no more than will stand with reason? Doth not the Scripture tell us of a burning bush 
i Exod. 3.2. , a bush that burned with the fire, and was not consumed? And the Historians, of the Hills of Aetna and Vesuvius, which do almost continually send out dreadful flames, and yet never waste? And the Philosophers of a Worm or Beast, which they call the Salamander, whose natural habitation is in the midst of the fire? and the Poets of Prometheus, and Titius Vultures, which having fed so many hundred years upon their Bowels, had not yet devoured them? Doth not experience tell us daily, That the lightning glanceth on our Bodies often, but doth seldom hurt us? And doth not Ovid say expressly, Nec mortis poenas mors altera finiet hujus 
k Ovid. in Ibin. , That there is a second death which shall never end? yet I confess, that the prevailing Heresy which pretends to such wit and piety, hath no small reason to declare, Interire posse animas aut ab exitio liberari 
l Ap. Grotius in Matth. 25. , That the souls of wicked and impenitent men shall either be annihilated, or in fine released. For we may safely say of these new Pretenders, as once Minutius did of the old Philosophers, Malunt penitus extingui, quam ad supplicia reparari 
m Minu●. Fel. in Dial. ; Considering how they have subverted all the Fundamentals of the Christian Faith, it is all the reason in the world, that they should rather wish to be annihilated, than survive to torments, such torments as shall know neither end, nor measure.  
BUt blessed JESUS, why do we waste our time in such nice disputes, in proving and disproving points of so clear an evidence, which were much better spent in pursuits of those ways and courses, by which we might have hope to fly from the wrath to come. Thou Lord hast set before us both Heaven and Hell, commandest us to choose the one, and avoid the other; and tracedst us out the way unto life eternal, both by thy Doctrine and Example. Conduct us we beseech thee in the paths of righteousness, suppress that itch of curiosity, which hath not left one Article of the holy Faith without stain or censure; and make us cheerfully submit our Reason to the Rule of Faith. And thou O God, the Father Almighty, Maker of Heaven and Earth, send down thy holy Spirit into our hearts, that by his Grace we may believe in thine only begotten son JESUS CHRIST our Lord, place all our hopes upon the merits of his most precious death and passion, our comforts in his glorious Resurrection and Ascension; That by his means and mediation, we may be made true Members of thy Catholic Church, enjoy a right Communion with thy blessed Saints, and the remission of our sins in this present world; That so we may be made partakers of the Resurrection unto Life eternal in the world to come. So be it. Amen.   
FINIS.