/a /%£■ < / p '1 ■7S~ t * 4 * -J* /. / etCOU' A, 1 . %etr — /' 8 L~ 6, Return this book on or before the Latest Date stamped below. v ECCLESIA ANGLICANA ECCLESIA CATHOLICA; OR, THE DOCTKIN E OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND CONSONANT TO SCRIPTURE, REASON, AND FATHERS: A DISCOURSE UPON THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES % AGREED UPON IN THE CONVOCATION HELD AT LONDON MDLXII. BY WILLIAM BEVERIDGE, D.D. LORD BISHOP OF ST. ASAPH. SECOND EDITION, REVISED. OXFORD: AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. M.DCCC.XLVI. X ADVERTISEMENT. r A fN PTMIE reader is now for the first time presented with an entire and authentic edition of Bishop Beve¬ ridge’s Discourse on the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion. For this he is indebted to the kindness of the Rev. Dr. Routh, president of Magdalen college, who pur¬ chased the original manuscript in the bishop’s hand¬ writing, of Mr. Thomas Thorpe, the bookseller, about ten years since, together with another hitherto un¬ published work by the same author, intituled, Ewamen religionum , videlicet Ethnicce Muhammedicce Jadaicce et Christiana. Both these works Mr. Thorpe obtained in the year 1829 at the sale of the library of the Rev. Mr. Stanley, sometime rector of Much Hadham, in the county of Hertford, who was a descendant of William Stanley, D.D. dean of St. Asaph, and also rector of Much Hadham, and whose aunt bishop Beveridge had married. In the year 1716, eight years after the bishop’s decease, Richard Smith, the bookseller, printed an x incomplete edition, containing the comment on the first thirty articles only; complaining at the same time in his advertisement to the reader that he was f unable to procure the remainder of the work. It a 2 \ 703694 IV ADVERTISEMENT. should here be observed, that, besides the comment > on the last nine articles never before printed, the MS. has authorized the introduction of several variations in the earlier part of the bishop’s Discourse. There is no evidence to shew at what particular period of the bishop’s life this treatise was composed ; nor is the cause apparent why the author did not in his lifetime publish a work on which he has bestowed much care and learning. It is not unlikely, however, that as bishop Burnet, his contemporary, was known to be engaged in his Exposition of the Thirty-nine Articles, bishop Beveridge, with his characteristic modesty, kept back his own work, in deference to another who was engaged in the same pursuit. Bishop Burnet’s work first appeared in 1699 - Oxford, Jan. 31, 1840, ADVERTISEMENT OF THE BOOKSELLER TO THE READER, Prefixed to the edition printed 1716. A S in the titlepage this is said to be an Exposition of the Thirty-nine Articles, of which notwithstanding no more than the first thirty are here published, the reader will justly expect to be informed of the reason of it. The learned author has indeed left the Exposition actually finished, together with a Preface and Index to it; to which, with all his other manu¬ scripts, I have an undoubted right, as any one may be satisfied that pleases to see the receipt I have under the hand of his executor. But the manuscript volume which contained the remaining part of this work, happening to fall into other hands, has been hitherto detained from me. I was not in¬ sensible of the hazard I was to run in publishing only a part of a book however excellent in itself; notwithstanding, this did not deter me from beginning, and now at last finishing all that I have at present of it. I have not been wanting in my endeavours to recover the rest, in order to make the book answer the title, and to publish it complete at once : however, as I do not yet wholly despair that the gentleman, who has the custody of it, may by some means be prevailed upon to resign it up to me ; so proposing to publish it upon the same paper and print with this, and with the number of pages continued in order to complete the volume, I thought it most convenient to prefix the title of the whole to what the reader is now presented with. If what remains cannot be procured, then let this advertisement stand as an apology for the im¬ propriety of the titlepage, and serve to inform posterity, that VI THE BOOKSELLER the author had taken the pains to complete this great work, however unjustly the world is deprived of the sight of part Ol it- I found it was the general opinion of our learned men, that the attempts which some have already made upon this subject have not wholly superseded all farther endeavours upon it; and therefore made no doubt, that this new Essay would be kindly received, especially when known to be writ by an author of so great eminence for his profound learning and piety, and unquestionable zeal for the established Church. But because some pretended to make a question, whether the publishing of it would be for the honour of the author, and the common benefit; the best way I had to satisfy them, was to print such a part of it by way of specimen, as the world might from thence be able to form a judgment of the whole work. For this reason I published some of the first Articles by themselves, and was presently confirmed in my former opinion how well it was like to be received, both by the great impatience I every where found for the rest, and by the high recommendations given of it by the generality of learned men, as well with respect to the plain, modest, sincere and impartial manner in which it is writ, as for the happy application of the author’s great learning and universal reading in it. Whether the author had put his finishing hand to this work, I canot pretend to determine ; no doubt, however, but the edition of it would have been more correct and perfect had he lived to overlook it himself. But his deferring to publish it himself is unreasonably suggested by some as an argument against the worth of it, considering especially the author’s great modesty, for which he was no less eminent than his piety and learning. Besides, if this were an argument, it would equally affect his other posthumous works I have published, which notwithstanding have met with an universal approbation. As to what the same persons farther object, that this was one of the author’s juvenile works, and therefore not fit for public view; I must confess I have no certain information what time he did write it. But I am much mistaken, if the author’s known prudence and modesty would suffer him to TO THE READER. y 11 undertake a work of so great importance, and so critical a nature, before he was arrived to a good maturity of years and judgment; and I leave the learned reader to judge, whether it is probable that so profound a knowledge of holy scriptures, lathers, councils, ecclesiastical and rabbinical writers, and oriental languages, as is every where discovered in this work, could be attained before the author was pretty well advanced in years. But granting that he did finish it in his youth, it must so much the more redound to his immortal honour, as it will speak him no less than a prodigy of parts and learning. At least, among competent judges, it will never be the worse received upon this score. We know that the late learned Bishop of Worcester's Origines Sacr,e has not been the less esteemed, though published by the author when he was but four and twenty years of age. By the specimens that have been already published of this work, I do not find that it has met with any opposition, but by such as are the known enemies of our Church; the doctrines of which are here, as I am well informed, so sincerely ex¬ plained, and excellently confirmed. Notwithstanding they will find it hard to meet with any thing in this work that can justly provoke them, but many to cure them of their prejudices, and reconcile them. There is a peculiar strain of piety, seriousness, and charity, that runs through all this author's compositions, which cannot fail to affect those whom even his reasons cannot convince. Nor has this been without its good effects upon many people's minds already ; insomuch that we can upon good grounds say, that the opportune publishing of the writings of this great prelate has put no small stop to that torrent of profaneness and infidelity so much complained of. And therefore any attempts to lessen their value can never be thought to be made for the service of religion ; especially when the only objection that the most malicious have been able to find out against them, is in respect to some pretended defects in the style and manner of expression. For granting that he may in some few places, even of this book, abound in turns and antitheses, this is known by the learned to be so much the style of many of the primitive fathers, that his close imitating of them in piety and ortho- viii THE BOOKSELLER TO THE READER. doxy will easily excuse his imitating them in this also. But in short, the Bishop had higher views than to please those who look no deeper than into the style of an author : his business was to inform the judgment, and not to please the fancy ; and he writ for those who read with a sincere dis¬ position to be informed, and not for those who have been always known to endeavour to destroy the credit of every thing that tends to promote piety. How much soever it may have been the interest and con¬ cern of some to hinder the publishing of this work, I am very confident the learned world, who have seen the first Article, would have been very sorry to have lost the opportunity of perusing the rest. His other writings, which have rendered his name famous over all Europe, have caused every compo¬ sition of his to be earnestly desired. It scarce would have been believed that this work, which is rather of greater, certainly not of less importance than any of his other writings, and upon which he has visibly bestowed so much pains, was not worthy of public view. To have suppressed it would have rather been an injury to his memory than otherwise ; and would have been taken, as if so great and pious a man had to no purpose employed so great a part of his time, of which no person was known to be a better husband. Though I have endeavoured as much as I could to render the edition of this book correct; yet, through the hurry of the press, occasioned by the great impatience for it, I am sensible some errors, and those not merely literal, have passed uncorrected. I desire the candid reader to lay these to the charge of the printer, and by no means to the author; and when the rest of the work comes forth, I promise that the most considerable of them shall be taken notice of by way of errata. THE PREFACE TO THE READER, N O sooner were the boisterous storms of persecution raised by Rome heathen against the church of Christ allayed by the goodness of the great God, but Constantine, that renowned emperor, forthwith gathered together all the bishops of the Christian world into a council at Nice, a city in Bithynia, to end the controversies that were then on foot, and to settle one faith and truth to be acknowledged and professed by the universal church. In like manner, when those fiery persecutions, kindled and blown up by the same Rome, now papal, in the days of Queen Mary, against the church of Christ in this nation, were once blown out by the breath of the Most High, our gracious Queen Elizabeth, of ever blessed memory, for the establishing consent touching true religion, called the bishops and clergy of both provinces of this nation into a council, held at London, an. Dom. 1562, where they agreed upon certain Articles of religion, to the number of thirty-nine, which to this day remain the constant and settled doctrine of our church; which, by an act of par¬ liament of the 13th of Queen Elizabeth, an. Dom. 1571, all that are entrusted with any ecclesiastical preferments are bound to subscribe to, and which have been several times since that ratified and confirmed by several proclamations and declarations, set forth by King James and King Charles the First of ever blessed memory, as also by our most gracious sovereign that now is. And last of all, in the late act for uniformity, 14 Carol. II, subscription is again required to them* BEVERIDGE* b X PREFACE TO THE READER. Now these are the Articles which are the subject of this following Discourse, wherein I have not undertaken to expound any doubtful and ambiguous phrases we may meet with in them, but taking each Article in its most usual literal and grammatical sense, I have endeavoured to prove the scope and substance of it to be a real truth in itself, which we are bound to believe, and by consequence to subscribe to when required by authority. The method I propounded to myself in this Discourse, was first to shew that each Article for the sum and substance of it is grounded upon the scriptures, so that if it be not ex¬ pressly contained in them, howsoever it may by good and undeniable consequence be deduced from them. Having shewn it to be grounded upon the scriptures, I usually prove it to be consonant to right reason too, even such a truth, that though scripture did not, reason itself would command us to believe it. And lastly, for the further confirmation of it, I still shew each Article to be believed and acknowledged for a truth by the Fathers of the primitive church, that so we may see how though in many things we differ from others and from the present church of Rome, yet we recede not in any thing from the primitive and more unspotted church of Christ. These are the three heads I ordinarily insist upon, still keeping that excellent passage of a St. Augustine in my mind: “ No sober man will think or hold an opinion against reason, no Christian against the scripture, and no lover of peace against the church.” And therefore, seeing all these Articles are grounded upon scripture, assented to by reason, and delivered by the primitive as well as the present church, he must be no sober, Christian, nor peaceable man that sets himself against them. And in speaking unto these heads, and so through the whole work, I have endeavoured so to order and contrive it, that such as are not skilled in the learned languages may read and understand the sum and substance of it without any disturbance or interruption, and therefore I have not a Contra rationem nemo sobrius, contra scripturas nemo Christianus, contra ecclesiam nemo pacificus senserit.—August, de Trin. 1. iv. c. 6 . PREFACE TO THE READER. xi inserted any sentences or phrases of Latin, Greek, or Hebrew, or any other language with our English, into the body of the book, but whatsoever Father or other author I quote, I translate what I so cite out of him into our own language, not tying myself to render every thing word by word, but only to give the substance of that in our language which they delivered in others. But, howsoever, to prevent those frivolous cavils that are sometimes made against translations, as also for the ease and satisfaction of intelligent readers, whatsoever testimonies of the Fathers I produce in the body of the book, I have still set down in the margent their own words, in their own language which they wrote in, such of the Greek Fathers excepted which we have only the Latin translations of. And though in the body of the book there is nothing delivered but in our own vulgar language, yet in the margent, besides the several places of scripture explained out of the oriental lan¬ guages, I have all along alleged the testimonies of the Fathers for the further explanation and confirmation of what is there delivered, not stuffing the margent with any quotations of modern writers, but only of the Fathers, unless it be in shewing the doctrine of the present church of Rome, which some of the Articles necessarily require. And in my quo¬ tations of the Fathers I am still careful not to refer the reader only to such or such places of their writings, (which sort of references I sometimes find multiplied to little or no purpose,) but to set down their words at length, which maketh that the margent sometimes swells bigger than the text itself. And in my quotations of St. Chrysostome especially, because he is so voluminous, I often cite the tome and page, viz. of Sir Henry Savile’s edition; which I here note particularly, because in the book I seldom mention the edition I made use of. And I have endeavoured so to order it, that in one place or other in the book, either in the text or margent, we may see the judgment of the primitive church upon most of the prin¬ cipal heads of our Christian religion. And because for the right understanding of discourses of this nature it is very requisite to know the several ages or times wherein the Fathers cited are supposed to have lived XU PREFACE TO THE READER. and the councils to have been celebrated, I have at the end of the book set down a catalogue of the Fathers, councils, and other ancient authors made use of in this book, together with the several times and places wherein they flourished. Thus desiring that the most high God would be pleased so to order it, that what I have done by his strength may make for his glory and our church’s good, by helping towards the reconciling of her enemies to, and the confirming her children in those sacred truths, I commit both thee and it into his hands, who alone can lead us into all truth; without whose blessing the greatest works will be unsuccessful, whereas with it the least shall be beneficial. A DISCOURSE UPON THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES. ARTICLE I. OF THE HOLY TRINITY. There is but one living and true God. T HAT there is some such Being in and over the world, which we in English call God , is not here made a distinct article of our faith in England, because it is an article of faith in all nations through the whole world : there being no a language so barbarous but it hath some word or other signifying the same thing in it; nor any b people so a The Sclavonian tongue express¬ ed! the same thing by Buck, the Panonian by Istu, the French by Dieu, the Italian by Dio and Iddio, the Polonian by Buog, the Egyptians by Teut, the Spanish by Dios, the German by Gott, the Belgic by Godt, the Magi by Orsi, &c. And as for the learned languages, the Latin Deus, the Greek Qcos, the Hebrew niru Jehovah, and n'dbs Elohim, the Chaldee Elah, and Elaha, the Syriac jcT.2^ Aloho, and Morio, the Arabic Ilahon, and Allalio, the Ethiopic Amlac, and ?V3H.A-flrh>C Egziabcher, the Samaritan, ZA El, and ZA Elah, and the Persic Choda, all signify the same thing that our word God doth; neither was there ever any language found out that hath not some word or other equi¬ valent to it. Tlavres yap on cariv 6 Qeos opo- Xoyovcri Koivrj ivvo'ia. Just. Quasst. et resp. ad Graec. [I. i.] Rat hi Xoyco, Kara edvr) Kai 8>)povs, dvaias Kardyovoriv, as civ edeXoocriv avOpanroL, Ka\ pvcrrppia. ol 8e AlyxinTLOi Kai alXovpovs, #cai KpoKo8el\ovs, sal ocpeis, sal aanldas Kai Kvvas, Qeovs vopi- £ovctl‘ Kai tovtois TTacrcv cVirpeVere Kai vphs Kai ot vopoi‘ to pev ovv prjS’ oXoos Qcov rjyeicrOai, dcrcdcs Kai dvocriov voplcravres ' to 8e, ois eKacrros fiovXerai \P0cOai tos Qeois, avay- Kaiov’ iva to) npos to 6ciov 8eei, ane- Xcovrai rov dSiKelv. Athenag. legat. pro Christ, init. [i.] BEVERIDGE. B 2 Of the Holy Trinity. Art. atheistical as not to acknowledge and worship the thing signified by it. Nay, rather than err on one hand in worshipping no God at all, most err on the other hand in worshipping more than b one : there being no nation but worships some God, some nations worship many. Hence* I say, it is, that, in the determining of the distinct and fundamental articles of faith professed by our church of England, it would have been altogether superfluous to have made the existence of a Deity any of them; that being no more than what is undoubtedly acknowledged in all nations, and necessarily supposed in all religions ; and so in this of ours also: for in that it is a religion, or a special and peculiar manner of performing worship to God, it must needs suppose there is some God to whom such worship is to be performed. And in this sense, the existence of a Deity, as the foundation of all religion, is necessarily implied in every one of these ensuing articles; and therefore also it need not be made a distinct article of itself. Supposing therefore the existence of a Deity, this the first part of this first article only expresseth the unity of that Deity that doth exist. The first hath been acknowledged by all; the second denied by many heretofore; yea, and now too, though not amongst us, yet in other parts of the world, as in Africa and America, where they worship sun, moon, stars and other creatures, yea, have almost as many gods worshipped by men as there are men to worship them; every one, according to his own fancy, framing to himself a Deity, and then performing worship to it. To keep out therefore such extravagant fancies from amongst us, it is here set down as the foundation of all our fundamental articles, that there is but “ one living and true Godwhere we also have not only our one God opposed to their many, but differenced from every one of them. They have many, but they are all dead and false gods; we have but one, but he is the living and the true God. The living God, who hath life both in and from himself; who is not only the abvss of life in himself, but the fountain of life to us; who lives upon nothing but himself, and hath all things living upon himself; yea, who is so the living God, as to be life itself: so that it cannot be so b all MS. Of the Holy Trinity. 8 1 . properly said, that he hath life, as that he is life; life to himself, and life to all living creatures. What we c have is really distinguished from what we are. And therefore when we speak of God, in whom there is no distinction of one perfection from another, or of any of them from himself, we speak more agreeably to his nature, and more conformably to his truth, when we say he is, rather than hath such a perfection; he is wisdom, he is power, he is goodness, he is justice, and so, he is d life itself: especially when we consider, that he is usually and truly apprehended as the most pure and simple act; which exactly answers the right notion of that which we term life. And our God being thus the living, he must needs be the true God. Many of the heathens, I confess, worshipped living creatures, which notwithstanding were false gods ; not because living, but because creatures, and therefore so living, as not to live of themselves, much less to be life itself, but to derive it from another : and so the borrowed life of theirs could speak them no more than false gods, but the uncreated, original life of ours proclaims him to be the true God. Where the words true God are not to be extended so far as to signify a God of truth, but only in truth a God: though that other is necessarily included in this; for he that is in c Tu aliud es, aliud habes. Verbi gratia, habes sapientiam: numquid tu es Sapientia ? Denique quia non es tu ipse quod babes, si amiseris quod habes, reddis ut non habeas : et aliquando resumis, aliquando amittis. Quomodo oculus noster non in seipso habet inseparabiliter lucem, aperitur et capit, clauditur et amittit. Non sic Deus Dei Filius, non sic est Verbum Patris : sic habet sapientiam, ut ipse sit Sa¬ pientia, faciatque sapientes : sic habet vitam, ut sit ipse Vita, faciat¬ que viventes. Aug. [vol. III. Par. II.] in Joh. Tract. 48. [6.] d Quoniam Deus vita est et in- corruptela et veritas. Irenaeus, adv. Haeres. 1 . 2. c. 18. [II. 13. 9.] Deus est summa Vita, et summa Sapientia, et summa Dilectio. Quantum ergo vita vivit, tantum intelligit et tantum se diligit. Si enim non tantum se intelligit quantum vivit, nequaquam summa Sapientia erit; et si non tantum se diligit quantum se intel¬ ligit, summa Dilectio minime existit. Aug. [vol. VI.] de cognit. verae vitae, [Append.] c. 19 : and thus he attributes other perfections also to him in the abstract; as, Et heec Trinitas unus est Deus solus, bonus, magnus, aeternus, omni- potens: ipse sibi Unitas, Deitas, Magnitudo, Bonitas, Omnipotentia. Id. de temp. serm. 38. [Alcuin. de Trin. I. 6.] Nefas autem est dicere, ut subsistat et subsit Deus bonitati suae, atque ilia bonitas non sub¬ stantia sit vel potius essentia, neque ipse Deus sit bonitas sua, sed in illo sit tanquam in subjecto. Id. de Trinit. 1. 7. c. 5. [vol. VIII. 1. vii. 10.] B 2 4 Of the Holy Trinity . Art. truth I God must needs be a God of truth, truth being a perfection, and so necessarily required to the right notion of a Deity. And thus it is that there is but one living and true God , and therefore true, because living: and that there is but one living and true God, is a truth grounded upon scripture, agreeable to reason, and taught by the fathers long ago. First for scripture. And truly to find out scripture to prove this truth, I need not turn over many leaves, for there is scarce a page that I can cast mine eye upon in my first opening of the Bible, but would furnish me with sufficient arguments for it. But I shall content myself with these three or four of the most prevalent and convincing. The first place is that, e Hear , 0 Israel , The Lord our God is one God , Deut. vi. 4: where we may plainly see, that that God, whom Israel, and so we are bound to worship, is no more than one. But because this place hath been impugned by several heretics in the church, as Valentinus, Basilides, and others, affirming it to import no more, than one in will, and one in heart; as the multitude of believers are said to be, Acts iv. 32 : so say they, though there be many gods, yet they all agree in one, and so may be said to be one, as he that plant eth and he that watereth is said to be one. 1 Cor. iii. 8. Because this place, I say, hath been so eluded, I shall produce others, upon which it is impossible to force such a distinction : as, Know therefore this day , and consider it in thine heart , that the Lord he is God in heaven above , and upon earth beneath : and there is none else. Deut. iv. 39. Where we see it is expressly avouched, that the Lord Jehovah is the only God, besides whom there is no other God in heaven or earth, and so in no place in the world. e In Hebrew it is mm ban ten four quarters of the world, and so ms mrv mnbs in which words the no other God in heaven or earth, or Jews observe there be two literal ma- any part of the world, but only jusculce, viz. y at the end of and Jehovah : for in Hebrew numbers "i at the end of ms, as for the first, makes four; and both these letters viz. v they say it was made greater being put together, as they here than the other letters, to put us stand, viz. first and then *r, they more in mind of the great truth we make up the word “?j? a witness j as if are there taught and commanded to he should say, The Lord is a witness hearken to; and as for the second, against you, as Mic. i. 2. or, You are viz. i (that makes for our purpose) witnesses unto me, as Isai. xliii. io. they say it is made larger to shew that the Lord our God is but one that there is but one God in all the God. I. Of the Holy Trinity. 5 And therefore he is not only one in will, but one in nature: there is no other God besides him, to be of the same will with him. And to the same purpose it is elsewhere asserted, I am the Lord , there is none else , there is no God besides me. Isa. xlv. 5. So that Valentinus may assert, and the heathens may worship many deities, but the Lord hath spoken it, and the scriptures affirm it, that there is no God besides Jehovah: and that not only in the places cited, but others also, as Deut. xxxii. 39 ; Isa. xliv. 6, 8 ; ch. xlv. 21, 22 ; Mai. ii. 10. And what the Old Testament asserts, the New Testament confirms, that there is none other God but one, 1 Cor. viii. 4 ; who is the living and the true God. 1 Thess. i. 9 ; Jer. x. 10. Neither is this so high a mystery as to be out of the sight of reason, and therefore only to be embraced by faith : for if we consult our reason, as we have done the scriptures, we shall find that as clear in concluding, as this is express in affirming of this truth. Indeed there is scarce an argument can be produced to prove the existence of a Deity, but may easily be brought over to prove the unity of that Deity also that doth exist. So that the same weapons that reason useth to beat down atheism, she may use also in her conflicts with polytheism : there is no god, and there are many gods, being propositions of the like absurdity in her account. The usual reason that is brought for the existence of a Deity is taken from the order of causes : to wit, because there must be some f one cause of all causes, which is the first cause of all other things, itself being caused by nothing, without which all causes would run in a circle, and never come to an end, but must pass from one to another even into infinitude itself: which reason looks upon as the greatest absurdity in the world: for then there would be eternal changes and motions within the narrow compass of time, and finite causes would have no end, and so become infinite: which being a plain contradiction, I need not bring any arguments to prove its further absurdity ; but, from the undeniable order and f Ab uno desuper Principio, quod Clem. Alex. Stromat. 1 . 7. [vol. II. convenienter voluntati operatur, de- p. 833. 40.] pendent prima, secunda, et tertia. 6 Of the Holy Trinity. Art. dependence of all causes upon one, must conclude, that there must be such an universal first cause, upon which all the rest must thus depend. And truly this argument proves as much, that there can be no more than one, as that there must be one such universal cause, which we call God. It being as great an absurdity to say there are many, as to say there is never a first cause. For, supposing many universal causes, either one must be before another, or one must not be before another. If one be not before another, none of them is the first cause, because there be others of equal causality with itself: if one be still before another, one of them must needs be before all the rest, and it is he alone that can be called the First Cause, because all the rest come after him. If after this we take a view of those perfections, which reason certainly concludes to be all concentred in the Deity, we shall clearly see, it is impossible they should be in more than one: so that to say they are in many, would be as much as to say they are in none at all. As first, supremacy, which is a perfection whereby we apprehend God as being the supreme Governor over all the world: which if he be not, our reason will not suffer us to call him God; nothing coming under the notion of a Deity, but what is above all other things whatsoever. Now if there should be many gods, either all of them should be equal to one another, or else one above another, as I said before. If they be all equal to one another, there is nevei* a superior, much less a supreme amongst them, and so never a one that in reason can be termed a God; they all wanting the great perfection of supremacy or sovereignty over all the world. If they be all one above another, there must be one above all the other ; and it is he alone that can be called God: and what we here say concerning supremacy in power, may be applied also to supremacy in greatness, goodness, or any other perfection: for there can be but one S chief good, and by consequence but one God. o This is the argument which I quia aut Deus non est summum bo- find Anselrne, archbishop of Canter- num, aut sunt plura summa bona, bury, elegantly deducing the unity aut non sunt plures Dii, sed unus of the Godhead from. Quod autem, solus. Deum vero summum bonum saith he, Unus solus sit Deus, et esse nemo negat; quia, quicquid ali- non plures, hinc facile probatur ; quo minus est, nullatenus Deus est, I. Of the Holy Trinity. 7 Again, infinitude in general is also a perfection, which reason cannot but attribute to God, and to none but God, whereby we apprehend him as without bounds and limits of his nature and glory ; which it is impossible for any more than one to be. For if one be without bounds, and so every where 11 , where can any other be, especially how can any other be without bounds and every where too ? Or more plainly, supposing two Gods, one essentially distinct from the other, where one of them is, the other also either is or is not: if the other be where that one is, then they are both together, and so their natures and glories confounded, and by consequence they are not essentially distinct Gods ; if the other be not where that one is, then it hath bounds and limits to its nature and glory, there being somewhere where his nature and glory is not; and therefore he cannot be termed infinite, and consequentially he is no God. Again, omnipotence is also a perfection, whereby God is not only infinite in nature, but in power, and so able to do whatsoever in its own nature doth not imply a contradiction, et quicquid summum bonum non est, minus est aliquo, quia minus est summo bono. Summum certe bo¬ num pluralitatem sui non admittit, ut plura sint summa bona. Si enim plura sunt summa bona, paria sunt. Summum ergo bonum est, quod sic praestat aliis bonis, ut nec par ha- beat, nec praestantius. Summum ergo bonum unum et solum est; non igitur sunt plures Dii, sed unus et solus est Deus. Sicut summum bonum est unum et solum, sic sum¬ ma substantia, vel essentia, sive na- tura, quae eadem ratione, qua sum¬ ma, nullatenus pluraliter dici posse probantur. Anselm, de incarnat. Verbi c. 4. [p. 85. D.] And long before him Tertullian; Duo ergo summa magna quomodo consistent, cum hoc sit summum magnum par non habere ? par autem non habere, uni competat., in duobus esse nullo modo possit. Adv. Marcion. 1. 1. [c. 3.] Deum autem unum esse oportet: quia quod summum sit, Deus est: summum autem non erit, nisi quod unicum fuerit. Id. adv. Herm. [c. 4.] Porro summum mag¬ num unicum sit necesse est: ergo et Deus unicus erit: non aliter Deus, nisi summum magnum: nec aliter summum nisi parem non habens: nec aliter parem non ha- bens, nisi unicus fuerit. Id. advers. Marc. lib. 1. [c. 3.] prius cit. Ilou 8e Kal ecrrai 6 kcit avrovs deos, tci ravra rod povov Kal dXrjdivov nXrjpovvros Kara rrjv rov ovpavov Kal yrjs TrepCKpyp-Lv ; Athanas. Orat. con¬ tra gentes, [6.] Et 8vo dpxps, 77 7 rXelovs tjcrav 6eo\, rjroc ev evl Kal ravrcp rjcrav, ?} I8la eKaaros avrcov. iv pev ovv evl Kal ravrcp elvai ovk rj8v- vavro, ov yap el deol, bpoioi' dX A.’ on dyevrjrol re Kal yevprol, ovx op. 0101 .— el 8e I8la eKcicrrov avrcov ovros, rov rov Kocrpov 7renoir] kotos, dvcorepco rcov yeyovoriov Kal nepl a eTrolpcre re Kal eKOcrppcre, ttov 6 erepos, rj 01 Xocnol ; el yap 6 pev Kocrpos crcfraipiKos ano- reXecrdels, ovpavov kvkXols anoKe— KXeicrrai, 6 8e rov Kocrpov IIoir]T7)s dvcorepco rcov yeyovdrcov eVe^co v avrbv rrj rovrcov rrpovoia, ns o rov erepov 6eov rj rcov Xolttcov tottos ; Athenag. Leg. pro Christianis, [8.] 8 Of the Holy Trinity. Au T. or is possible to be done by any power. Now it is impossible there should be two essentially distinct persons endowed with this perfection. For, supposing two such persons, what one doth will easily be granted to be possible, in its own nature^ to be done; for otherwise he could not do it: but though it be possible in itself, yet is it impossible for the other supposed God to do it: for then there would be two whole and perfect causes of the same kind to one effect; which is a contradic¬ tion : for then one would be wholly the cause, and yet not wholly the cause, because there is another, that is as much the cause as itself. And therefore there can be no more than one such person invested with this perfection of ‘ Omnipotence, and so but one God. And if we do suppose several Gods of the greatest power imaginable, every one of them must needs have l^s power than all together, and by consequence not all power in his own hands : and that being that hath not all power is no All-powerful being, and therefore no God. But I needed not to have gone so far to have proved there are some perfections which it is impossible for many essentially distinct persons to be possessed of: for indeed unity itself is a perfection, which whosoever saith more than one can have at the same time, gives himself the lie. For if they be many essentially distinct Gods, how can they all be but one ? And therefore whatsoever other perfections many Gods may have, be sure this they must want, upon that very account, because i This argument from omnipo¬ tence Lactantius long ago made use of. Quis dubitet potentissimum esse regem, qui totius orbis habeat imperium ? neque immerito : cum illius sint, quae ubique sunt omnia : cum ad eum solum omnes undique copiee congerantur. At si plures partiuntur orbem: minus certe opum, minus virium singuli ha- bebunt, cum intra praescriptam por- tionem se quisque contineat. Eodem etiam modo Dii, si plures sint, mi¬ nus valebunt, aliis tantundem in se habentibus. Virtutis autem perfecta natura non potest esse nisi in eo in quo totum est, non in eo in quo pars exigua de toto est. Deus vero, si perfectus est, (nam per- fectus est,) ut esse debet, non potest esse, nisi unus, ut in eo sint omnia. Lactant. de falsa relig. c. 3. [p. 10.] Nemo est quidem qui sapiat ratio- nemque secum putet qui non unum esse intelligat, qui et condiderit om¬ nia, et eadem, qua condidit, virtute moderetur. Quid enim multis opus est ad mundi regimen sustinendum ? Nisi forte arbitremur, si plures sint, minus habere singulos nervorum atque virium. Quod quidem fa- ciunt ii, qui esse multos volunt: quia necesse est, imbecilles esse : siquidem singuli sine auxilio reli- quorum tantae molis gubernaculum sustinere non possent. Deus autem, qui est seterna mens, ex omni utique parte perfectse consummateeque vir¬ tutis est. Quod si verum est; unus sit, necesse est. Ibid. [p. 9,] J. Of the Holy Trinity. 9 they are many: and so cannot be all perfectly Gods, because not perfect Gods, wanting some perfection which God must have, or not be God: and therefore, I conclude even from reason, that seeing in the order of causes there must be one, and but one first cause ; and seeing there can be no more than one Being absolutely supreme, infinite, omnipotent, and one*; “ There is but one living and true God. - ” And this was the doctrine which the fathers of old taught. 1 shall instance but only in some : as first Tertullian k : “ But the Christian truth strictly saith, God, if he be not one, he is none: for whatsoever is not as it ought to be, we think better of it, if we believe it not to be. But that thou mayest know that God should be but one, inquire what God is, and thou wilt find it cannot be otherwise. As far as the human state can define any thing of God ; I assert, what every one's con¬ science also acknowledgeth, that God is the chief and highest Being in the world, eternal, unbegotten, unmade, without beginning, without end. Therefore he must needs be one only, because he is the cliiefest, not having an equal, lest he should not be the cliiefest." And before him Ignatius: lu Therefore God and the Father is but one, not two or three; he being one, and there is none besides him, the alone true God. For, The Lord , saith he, thy God is one Lord. And again, did not one God make us? have not we all one Father?" And Justin Martyr tells us, that, m “ According k Seel veritas Christiana destricte prommeiavit: Deus, si non unus est, non est: quia-dignius credimus non esse, quodcunque non ita fuerit lit esse debebit. Deum autem ut scias unum esse debere, quaere quid sit Deus, et non aliter invenies. Quantum humana conditio de Deo definire potest, id definio, quod et omnium conscientia agnoscet : Deum, summum esse magnum, in aeternitate constitutum, innatum, in- fectum, sine initio, sine line.—Ergo unicuin sit necesse est, quod fuerit summum magnum, par non haben- do, ne non sit summum magnum. Tertull. adv. Marcion. lib. i. [c. 3.] 1 Els ovv Geos /cat 7 rarijp, /cat ov bvo, ovbe rpel?, Et? 6 a>v, /cat ovk ec rrt 7 rXi)v avrov, 6 povos dXrjdtvos. Evpios yap, v ovre vnoKei- pevov ovre dvriKelpevov, depdaprov eywv tt)V ovo’lav, Ka'i dvepnoburTov tt)v evepyeiav, brjpLovpybs &>v rov Koa- pov Travros. Justin. Martyr, in Aristot. Dogmat. evers. [init. C.] 10 Of the Holy Trinity. Art. to those, who by learning know the difference betwixt God and a creature, there is but one God, unbegotten, according to both the manners of unbegetting, who hath not any gods either before or after himself, having none coeternal with him¬ self, none subject or opposite to him, having an incorruptible nature and irresistible power, himself being the maker of the whole world.” And Atlienagoras to the same purpose: n “ But all our discourse is only to shew that there is but one God, the maker of the universe, who himself being not made (for that which is, is not made, but that which is not) he made all things by his word.” St. Cyprian 0 : “ Therefore there is one God, Lord of all; for his highness cannot have an equal, see¬ ing himself hath all power in his own hand.” And presently : P u The bees have one king, the flocks one captain, and the herds one leader, much more hath the world but only one Governor, who commandeth all things with his word, dis- penseth all things with his wisdom, and perfecteth all things by his power. He cannot be seen, he is more clear than sight; nor comprehended, he is more pure than touch; nor valued, for he is beyond all sense: and therefore we so worthily es¬ teem of him to be God, when we think him inestimable.” And liuffinus not only tells us that, but shews us how God is said to be one: 9“ But that which we said that the Eastern churches deliver, that the Father is omnipotent, and only one n ’E7ret 6 Xo-yos 77/xcov eva Qeov dyei, tov Tovde tov ttovtos 7roit]Tr]v, avrov pev ov yevopevov (oti to bv ov yivercu «AAa to pr] ov) navra oe ota tov ivap avTov \6yov TvrTronrjKOTa. Athenag. nep\ XpiaTiavcov, [4.] 0 Unus igitur omnium Dominus Deus: neque eniin ilia sublimitas potest habere consortem, cum sola omnem teneat potestatem. Cyprian, de idoloruin vanitate, [p. 14.] p Rex unus est apibus, et dux unus in gregibus, et in armentis rector unus: multo magis mundi unus est rector, qui universa, quae- cunque sunt, verbo jubet, ratione dispensat, virtute consummat. Hie enim videri non potest, visu clarior est: nec comprehendi, tactu purior est: nec aestimari, sensu major est; et ideo sic eum digne aestimamus, dum inaestimabilemdicimus./6. And Minutius Felix in bis Octavius doth not only use the same arguments, but the same words too. Whence we may gather, that one had not only seen, but borrowed from the other: and it is probable Cyprian from Minutius, who was about thirty years his senior. Q Quod autem diximus orientis ecclesias tradere patrem omnipoten- tem et unum Dominum, hoc modo intelligendum est; unum non nu- mero dici, sed universitate. Verbi gratia. Si quis dicit unum homi- nem, aut unum equum, hie unum pro numero posuit; potest enim et alius homo esse, et tertius, vel equus. Ubi autem secundus, vel tertius non potest jungi, unus si dicatur, non numeri, sed universitatis est nomen. I. Of the Holy Trinity . 11 Lord, it is to be understood after this manner; one, not in numbers but in universality. As for example, if one should say, one man, or one horse, here he puts one for a number, for there may be another man and a third; and so for one horse too: but where a second or third cannot be added, if any thing be called one, that doth not denote number, but universality: as for example, if we should say, one sun; that is so called one, that a second or third cannot be added: the sun is one. Much more when God is called one, one is a word, not of number, but universality; that is, he is therefore called one, because there is no other. And so we must think also of our Lord, that there is one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the Father governs all things; so that God is so one, as no one besides him is; he is so one God, as that there is not, there cannot be another God besides him. 1 ’ And therefore saith Tertullian also r : “ The state of the one only God challengeth this rule, no otherwise one, than because alone, nor otherwise alone, than because there is nothing with him.” Shall I thrust in a learned rabbi amongst these reverend fathers? Moses Maimonides speaks fully to the purpose s : “ This God is one, not two nor more than two; but one, whose unity is not like that of the ones or individuals that are found in the world; nor one by way of species containing several indivi¬ duals under it; nor one, as a body is, which may be divided into several parts or extremities; but he is so one, as that there is no one in the world so one as he is.” And it is one of the articles of the Jews’ faith, tu I verily believe that the Ut si, exempli causa, dicamus unum solem, hie unus ita dicitur, ut alius vel tercius addi non possit: unus est sol. Multo magis Deus, cum unus dicitur, non numeri, sed universi- tatis vocabulo nuncupatur, id est, qui propterea unus dicitur, quod alius non sit. Similiter, et de Do¬ mino accipiendum est, quod unus sit Dominus noster Jesus Christus, per quern Deus pater Dominatum omnium tenet. Ruffin, in exp. symb. [ad calc. Cypriani opp. p. 18. Oxon. 1682.] r Unici Dei status banc regulam vindicat; non aliter unici, nisi quia solius, nec aliter solius, nisi quia nihil cum illo. Tertull. adv. Herm. c. 17. s □ ©© x 1 ? irsi sm ins m m^s ps© ins s'js Dnc bv inv D'ssnan ta'insn pa ms b’ma sin© pm ms s’? •o’ns-a sm© f|m ins sbi nun Dins ms sbs nvisp'n mp’mo 1 ? p’ma n'nva mmaa ms nn" ps© R. Mosch. bar Maimon, de fundament, leg. [I. 4.] t sum© no’?© naiosa pnsD 'as in©a mim.’ psi i'n' sin©© “pan' n'n ©mbs nab sim d©b Di©a .D'lpa? idd. nmimn Vid.etMaim. in Sanh. c. 10. et Buxt. Synag. Jud. c. 1. [p.3.] Of the Holy Trinity. Art. 12 Creator, whose name is Blessed, is one, and there is no unity like to his, and he alone was, is, and will be our God.” To these testimonies we may add that of Lactantius also u : u Let us come to authors, and cite those very persons for the proof of this truth, which they use to bring against us. It is the poets and philosophers I mean. It is necessary, that out of these we should prove there is but one God; not as if they had the right knowledge of the truth, but because so great is the power of truth, that none can be so blind as not to see the Divine splendour forcing itself into his eyes. The poets therefore, though they set out the gods with verses, and extol their acts with the highest praises, yet they often confess, that by one spirit and mind all things are contained and governed.” And truly there are many of the ancient heathen v poets, which have left this truth upon record in their writings, as Orpheus, Phocylides, Sophocles, Xenophanes, Colophonius, the Sibyls, and others whose testimonies we have thrown into the margin: by which we may see that this truth is both grounded upon scripture, concluded upon by reason, preached by the Fathers, believed by the Jews, yea, and acknowledged u Veniamus ad auctores, et eos ipsos ad veri probationem testes ci- temus, quibus contra nos uti solent; poetas dico et philosophos. Ex his urmin Deum probemus, necesse est: non quod illi habuerint cognitam veritatem, sed quod veritatis ipsius tanta vis est, ut nemo possit esse tam csecus, qui non viderit ingeren- tem se oculis divinam claritatem. Poetse igitur, quamvis Deos carmi- nibus ornaverint, et eorum res ges- tas amplificaverint summis laudi- bus, scepissime tamen confitentur, spiritu et mente una contineri regi- que omnia. Lactant. de Falsa Relig. c. 5. [p. 14.] v For this purpose is Orpheus cited not only by this author, Lac¬ tantius, but Justin Martyr also, who tells us, that though Orpheus was the first author of polytheism, yet afterwards he taught that there was but one God, in these verses : v’ avTos 8e' ye iravras bpujai. [p. 447 .] And again, [p. 455.] Efs Zet/y, efs ’A'i'S^s, efs "HAios, efs Aiouvaos. Efs 0e8s eV navreaerr Ti trot 8i'x« ravr ayopsvoo ; And Sophocles [Excerpt, e trageed. ed. H. Grotio, p. 149.] cited by the I. Of the Holy Trinity . 13 by the Gentiles also, and therefore it may well be subscribed to by us, even that there is hut one living and true God. Everlasting. After the unity of the Godhead asserted, here we have the nature of that one God described; and that by those proper¬ ties, which the scriptures, that he hath revealed to us, and the reason that he hath implanted in us, attribute and ascribe unto him. Where by properties we are not to understand several faculties, habits, or qualities, as they are in us. For there is nothing in God, but what is God: the mercy of God is the same with the God of mercy; the power of God the same with the God of power; the love of God the same with the God of love; and the truth of God the same with the God of truth. These properties of mercy, power, love, &c., as they are in us, they are accidents, and so really distinguished both from our souls, and from one another: but as they are in God, they are his nature and essence ; and so neither distin¬ guished from one another, nor from him in whom they are same author, as also by Athenago- ras in legat. pro Christ. E is reus aX-rjOeicuaiv, efs earn ®ebs, *'0 s ovpavbv Tereu^e Kal yrxiav /aaKpav, ndvrov re X a P° 1V ^ )V o78p.a, Kal at >ep.wv fiias. Phocylides, [v. 49.] Efs Geds ean aocpbs , buyaros y' a/aa Kal ttoAvo\/3os. Orpheus again not cited by Jus- in Martyr, [p. 457.] Zeus vpcoTos yevero, Zeus vcrraros apx i ~ Kepavvos , Zeus Keepa A')), Zeus /xeaaa, Aibs S’ e’/c iravra rervKTai. ‘ V E v uparos, eis baip-ocv yeveTO, /xeyas apX 0S airdvrcov. Xenophanes Colophonius, [p. 36.] Eis 0eSs ev re Oeoilari Kal auOpuTroicrL pityKTTOS OuSe be/xas Qv’pTo'iariv op-oltos oil 5e voii/xa. Horace, [ 1 . iii. od. 4.] Qui terrain inertem, qui mare temperat Ventosum, et urbes, regnaque tristia Divosque, mortalesque turmas Imperio regit unus aequo. The Sibyls, [p. 3. B.] Efs Oebs, ts fxovos &p%ei, v-rrepfieyed-qs^ ayevTjT os, YlayroKpaTcop , aoparos, opu>y p.6vos au- rbs uiravra’ Autos S’ ou /3A.67T erai Owprrjs virb cap - kos diracnjs. And again, [p. 19. C.] Efs 6e6s earn p.6vapx^s, aOeaeparos, alBepi va'uav, A vro(pv)]S, aoparos, 6pu>y p.6vos avrbs drravra. And truly these ancient poets, as Orpheus, Sophocles, &c., and par¬ ticularly the Sibyls, the Fathers in the infancy of the church made great use of to convince the Gentiles from their own authors, that there was but one God whom they ought to worship. And so indeed did St. Paul himself, disputing with the Greeks, cite their own poet Aratus against them, in those words, Tou yap Kal yevos ia/xeu. Acts xvii. 28 . 14 Of the Holy Trinity. Art. said to be. Distinguished from him or his essence they cam not be, for then he would be of himself imperfect; there being some property or perfection, which in his own nature he is not. And again, if the properties of God should be really distinguished from himself, in themselves they would be either finite or infinite. Finite they could not all be; for infinitude itself is one of his properties, yea, and in our conception a property of all his other properties; so that his wisdom, power, justice, are all infinite, otherwise they would be im¬ perfect : and therefore it is impossible all his properties, or indeed any of them, should be finite. And as they are not finite, so neither can they be infinite, if really distinguished from his essence: for then there would be something really distinguished from God infinite as well as God; and by con¬ sequence either God must not be infinite, and so not God; or else there must be two, yea, many infinites, which is as great an absurdity as the former. And therefore we must needs acknowledge, that the properties of God are not really distin¬ guished from the essence of God: but that the properties attributed to his essence are really the same with his essence to which they are attributed. So that his power, wisdom, goodness, truth, and the like, are all his u essence, nature, or substance. And as they are not distinguished from his essence, so neither are they distinguished from one another; for then they must be really distinguished from his essence too, it being impossible that they should be all really and essentially distinct from one another, and yet be all but one and the selfsame essence. And again, if they should be really u There are many expressions in St. Augustine intimating and ex¬ plaining this unto us, that the pro¬ perties of God are the same with his essence. Homo aliud est, saith he, quod est, aliud quod potest, &c. Deus autem cui non est alia sub¬ stantia ut sit, et alia potestas ut pos- sit, sed consubstantiale illi est quic- quid ejus est, et quicquid est quia Deus est, non alio modo est, et alio modo potest, sed esse et posse simul habet, quia velle et facere simul ha- bet. Aug. [vol. III. par. II.] in Joh. Tract. 20. [4.] Non alia visio ejus, et alia substantia ejus; nec alia po- tentia ejus, alia substantia ejus; to- tum quod est, (filius) de patre est, totum quod potest, de patre est: quoniam quod potest et est hoc unum est. [Ibid. 8.] Si enim, quod pauci intelligunt, simplex est natura veritatis; hoc est filio (Deo) esse quod nosse. Ab illo ergo habet ut noverit, a quo habet ut sit: non ut prius ab illo esset, et ab illo postea nosset; sed quemadmodum illi gi- gnendo dedit ut esset, sic gignendo dedit ut nosset: quia simplici, ut dictum est, naturae verilatis esse et I. Of the Holy Trinity. 15 distinguished from one another, then God would be com¬ pounded or made up of several distinct properties, and so not a simple, and therefore not a perfect God. But by the properties therefore of God, we are to understand the several apprehensions that we have of him, according to the several manifestations that he maketh of himself to us. Which variety of discoveries of himself he maketh to us according to the variety of the objects which we apprehend him to act upon, and the variety of the circumstances that those objects may lie under. God in himself is a most simple and pure act, and therefore, as I have shewed, cannot have any thing in himself but himself, but what is that pure and simple act itself. Which seeing it bringeth upon every crea¬ ture what it deserves, giving vice its due punishments, and virtue its just rewards, we apprehend it an act of justice, and therefore call God a just God. Seeing it doth not give sin its punishments sometime so soon as we conceive it might, we apprehend it an act of patience, and call God a patient God. Seeing it doth still one time or other punish every offence, and yet upon some other account doth often pardon the offender, we apprehend it an act of mercy, and call God a merciful God. Seeing whensoever it puts forth itself upon doing any thing, it produceth whatsoever itself pleaseth, we apprehend it an act of might, and call God an almighty God. Seeing it acting upon objects, as possible to be known, it is acquainted with all things, that ever were, are, shall be, or can be, we apprehend it an act of knowledge, and call God an all- knowing God. Seeing it brings upon all creatures many such nosse, non est aliud atque aliud, sed hoc ipsum. Ibid. Tract. 40. [5.] Nefas autem est dicere ut subsistat et subsit Deus bonitati suae, atque ilia bonitas non substantia sit vel potius essentia; neque ipse Deus sit bonitas sua, sed sit in illo tanquam in subjecto. Id. de Trinit. 1 . 7. c. 5. [vol. VIII. 1 . vii. 10.] And the council at Rhemes, an. 1148, in their confession of faith expressly say, Credimus et confitemur simplicem naturam divinitatis esse Deum nec aliquo sensu catholico posse negari, quin divinitas sit Deus, et Deus di- vinitas. Sicubi vero dicitur, domini sapientia sapientem, magnitudine magnum, divinitate deum esse, et alia hujusmodi, credimus non nisi ea sapientia quae est ipse Deus sapi¬ entem esse, non nisi ea magnitudine quae est ipse deus magnum esse, non nisi ea aeternitate quae est ipse deus aeternum esse, non nisi ea unitate unum quae est ipse, non nisi ea di¬ vinitate Deum quae est ipse, id est seipso sapientem, magnum, aeter¬ num, unum Deum. Concil. Rhem. fid. symb. [vol. VI. par. II. p. I2 99-J 16 Of the Holy Trinity. Art. as we think good things, we apprehend it an act of goodness, and call God a good God. Seeing there are no bounds or limits of his essence and glory, we apprehend it an act of infi¬ nitude, and call God an infinite God. And seeing this God ever was, is, and will be the same unchangeable, pure and simple act, we apprehend it an act of eternity, and so call God an eternal God. And thus are the several properties that we attribute to God but the several apprehensions that we have in ourselves of him, according to the several disco¬ veries that he maketh of himself to us : and therefore though, as they are conceived by us, they are many, yet, as they are in him, they are all but one and the same simple and pure essence. And hence it is, that though his properties cannot be properly predicated one of another, so as to say his justice is his mercy, his wisdom is his power, his eternity is his love, yet they may all be predicated of God, so as to say God is justice, God is mercy, God is wisdom, power, and eternity. Neither can they only be predicated of God, but God may be predicated of them too, so as to say, justice in God is God, mercy is God, power is God; for as they are in himself, they are really himself, yea, so as that if we consider the properties of God, as they are in himself, I do not deny but they may in some sense, though improperly, be x predicated one of another, so as to say his justice is his mercy, his love is his power; for as they are in him, there is no such distinction betwixt justice and mercy, love and power, as there is when apprehended by us. But seeing the properties of God do not so much denote what God is, as what we apprehend him to be in himself, when the properties of God are predicated one of another, one thing in God is not predicated of another, but x Thus St. Augustine saith : An visus; and so one property in God of totus ille visus et totus auditus ? another. Not as if these properties forte ita, imo non forte sed vere ita: were distinct in God, and so capable dum tamen et ipsutn ejus videre et of making the subject and predicate ipsum ejus audire longe alio modo of a proposition; but in such pro- quam nostrum sit; et videre et au- positions as these are, visus est au¬ dire simul in verbo est: nec aliud ditus, and auditus visus, justitia est ibi est audire et aliud videre, sed misericordia, and misericordia est auditus visus, et visus auditus. Aug. justitia, in these, I say, and such [vol. III. par. II.] in Joh. Tract. 18. like propositions we are to under- [9.] Where we see he predicates stand both the subject and predi- visus of auditus, and auditus of cate as in God, but still with some I. Of the Holy Trinity . 17 our apprehensions of the same thing are predicated one of another. So that when I say, God’s justice is his mercy, his power is his wisdom, I do not predicate one perfection in God of another, for in God there are not any such distinct perfec¬ tions as that one of them should properly make the subject and the other the predicate of a proposition, but I only pre¬ dicate one apprehension that I have of the same Divine nature of the other. For as they are in God, they are not really distinct, I say, from one another; and therefore cannot pro¬ perly be subjects and predicates to one another; and the seve¬ ral denominations of love, goodness, justice, mercy, and the like, are grounded merely upon our several apprehensions of the same thing: which several apprehensions proceed from the finiteness of our understandings, who are not able to con¬ ceive of infinitude, or an infinite nature, as it is in itself, but only by piecemeal, as it manifesteth itself to us. And there¬ fore God, whose understanding is infinite, suitable to his nature, doth not apprehend himself under the distinct notions of good, just, powerful, wise, &c., but only as God; though he doth understand how we give such denominations to him, according to the several apprehensions that we have of him. Thus, therefore, carrying the right notion of the properties of God along with us, let us consider those properties which in this article are attributed to him; and the first is eternity. He is an everlasting God: which is a property, whereby we apprehend God, as one, who was before, and will be after, always without and above time ; in whom there is no such thing as first and last, past and to come. And therefore though I cannot apprehend his mercy to Abel, in the begin¬ ning of the world, and his mercy to me now, but as two reference to our distinct apprehen¬ sions of them. For seeing they are really the same in him, and yet are distinctly apprehended by us, we may well make one of them the sub¬ ject and the other the predicate of a proposition. When I say justitia est misericordia, here justitia and misericordia are two distinct pro¬ perties in my apprehension, though they signify one and the same thing in God, or rather one and the same God. And therefore when I say, God’s justice is his mercy, or his mercy is his justice, it is as much as if I should say, that perfection which I apprehend in God to be justice, is the same in him with his mercy, and that which I apprehend in him as mercy, is the same in him with his justice. c BEVERIDGE. 18 Of the Holy Trinity. Art, distinct expressions of his mercy, yet as they are in God, they are but one and the same act, as they are in God, I say, who is not measured by time, as our apprehensions of him are; but is himself eternity: a centre without a circumference, eternity without time. Indeed when we speak of eternity, time is but as a parenthesis clasped in of both sides with it: neither is the eternity before time, before that eternity that is after time; for there is but one eternity : and these words, before and after , Ypast and to come , are solecisms in eternity, being only fitted to express the several successions of time by. And thus do we believe that God is eternal or everlasting, not only as angels and rational souls are, who had a begin¬ ning, but will have no end, but as one who never had a beginning, nor ever will have an end: but what he was before, he is in, and will be after time, the same unchangeable God ; not younger at the beginning of time, nor older at the end of time, but in every thing continually one and the same God blessed for evermore. And for the true proof of this we shall first consult the scriptures : for there being none that knows God so well as himself, there is none can better tell what properties to attri¬ bute to him than himself; and therefore his word must needs be the best description of his essence. Now there is no property, that the scriptures attribute to God more frequently than eternity, calling him, The eternal God , Deut. xxxiii. 27; y Nec quid sit aeternitas, nisi in- telligendo conspicio. Mentis enim aspectu omnem mutabilitatem ab aeternitate sejungo : et in ipsa aeter- nitate nulla spatia temporis cerno; quia spatia temporis prseteritis et futuris rerum motibus constant. Nihil autem praeterit in aeterno, et nihil futurum est : quia et quod praeterit, desinit, et quod futurum est, nondurn esse coepit. iEternitas autem tantummodo est, nec fuit quasi jam non sit, nec erit quasi adhuc non sit. Qua propter sola ipsa verissime dicere potuit, Ego sum qui sum, et de ilia verissime dici poterat, qui est misit me. Aug. de vera rel. c. 49. fin. [vol. I. 97.] Et hoc vere habendum est aeternum, quod nullo tempore variatur, sicut in principio erat Verbum. Id. [vol. IV.] in Psal. lxxi. [8.] Atque in aeternitate nec praeteritum quicquam est, quasi esse desierit; nec futurum, quasi nondum sit; sed praesens tantum ; quia quicquid aeternum est, semper est. Id. in Ps. ii. [6.] Alternitas ipsa Dei substantia est, quae nihil habet mutabile; ibi nihil est praeteritum, quasi jam non sit; nihil est futurum, quasi nondum sit: sed non est ibi nisi, Est; non est ibi, Fuit et erit; quia et quod fuit, jam non est ; et quod erit, nondum est: sed quicquid ibi est, nonnisi est Id. in Ps. ci. Serm. 2. [10.] I. Of the Holy Trinity. 19 The King eternal, 1 Tim. i. 17; The everlasting God , Gen. xxi. 33, Isai. xl. 28; The everlasting Father, Isai. ix. 6*; The living God, and an everlasting King, Jer. x. 10 ; Yea, from everlasting to everlasting he is God, Psalm xc. 2; Who there¬ fore is to be blessed from everlasting and to everlasting. Psalm xli.13 ; Who is the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, which is, which was, and which is to come. Rev. i. 4, 8. Not as if God in his own nature was, and is to come, for he always is; but in these and the like places God speaks after the manner of men, who are not able with one simple apprehension to conceive of eternity, but are still forced to carry our thoughts backwards and forwards to apprehend what was heretofore, and shall be hereafter : therefore he is here said to be He that was, viz., without beginning, that is, viz., without succession, and is to come, viz., without end, . And therefore, when Moses would have God to give himself a name, he calls himself 7 I am what 1 am, and simply I am, Exod. iii. 14, viz. z Interpreters differ much in translating of these words TBHn'ns rrrrN Some translating them, Ero, qui sum j others, Ero, qui ero; others. Sum, qui erarn ; others. Sum, qui sum : and there is none of these interpretations but without offering violence to grammar rules may be put upon them. But it being a proper name of God, im¬ plying not any one, but all of these senses; others thought it better to retain the Hebrew words themselves, especially the Oriental translators, as Onkelos rrrm .yen rrnx the Syriac oi^oij J^j oi^aij Samar. ^rrrsfA ^nr^A the Persian Ehjeh asher Ehjeh. Only the Arabic doth not so much translate as expound the words, most excellently giving us the full meaning and purport of them, taking in all the foregoing expositions in these words, ^ cf jsB Alternus sum qui non praeterit. Which words shew both what the words properly de¬ note, even the eternity of God ; and wherein the nature of that eternity consisteth, even in being always the same, without preterition or succession of one part after another. And truly that these words do im¬ port the eternity of God, and by consequence not in vain made use of under this head, we have also abundant testimony from the Fa¬ thers. Quia divinum omne neque abolitioni, neque exordio obnoxium est. Et cum in nullo a se Dei desit aeternitas, digne hoc solum quod esset ad protestationem incorruptae suae aeternitatis ostendit. Et ad hanc quidem infinitatis significatio- nem, satis fecisse sermo dicentis videbatur. Ego sum, qui sum. Hilar, de Trinit. 1. I. [5, 6.] Bov\ei iv d7recrraAKe pe. to de, 6 cov, tov de\ eivai crrjpavTiKOV eaTi sat tov avdpxcos eivai , kcii tov ovtoos eivai sal Kvpidas. Chrysost. in Joh. Horn. 15. tom. ii. p. 614. '0? oWeLav eavrco Kai Trpenovcrav t[] eavTov d'idioTrjTi ev tc 5 npos tov idiov depanovra Maxrea C 2 20 Of the Holy Trinity. Art. one, who may always say I am , who always was, always is, and always is to come; who from eternity was, who in eternity is, who to eternity is to come. Yea, who is not only from eternity and to eternity, but who is eternity itself: and so is he called too as some suppose, (translating the word a netsahh eternity , which we translate strength ,) ^ Sam. xv. 29. So well may he be called the Ancient of clays , Dan. vii. 9. and his kingdom be termed an everlasting kingdom , Dan. iv. 3. And as scripture is express, so is reason clear in attributing this property unto God. For first, eternity is a perfection, such a perfection, without which the great God sometime would not have been, or sometimes will not be, and therefore can never be absolutely perfect, and so not God. And therefore all the arguments, that prove the existence, prove also not only the unity, but likewise the eternity of God. For what argument is an infallible proof of any truth, ever was and ever will be an infallible proof of it. But now if God ever was not, or ever would not be, (that is, if he be not eternal,) at such a time there would be no God; and therefore all the arguments that make for the existence of a Deity would then signify nothing: and so it is as certain a truth that God is eternal, as that he is. XP‘qn aTLcr l x elpi 6 a>p e(fir), rrjs cop c TvWaj3rjs, ov)( epa popop drjXovarjs, aWa tovs rpeis top re napikrfkvOoTa Ka\ top epecrTcoTa Ka\ top peWopra. Justin, ad Graec. cohort. 1. [25.] I. Of the Holy Trinity. said, I am what I am; the syllable am signifying not one, but three times, past, present, and to come. 11 (From whence we may also observe that Plato had seen the books of Moses.) And Minutius Felix saith 0 : “Dost thou believe that the supreme power in heaven is divided? and all the power of that true and divine empire to be parted ? When it is manifest, that the Father of all things, God, hath neither beginning nor end; who bestows a nativity upon all things else, but a perpetuity upon himself: who was before the world, being a world unto himself. 1 ’ And St. Augustine f : “ God only is immutable ; because nothing that is passed goes from him, neither will any thing that is to come, be added to him: but whatsoever is, was, or is to come, is all present with him. And as we can think of nothing (in him) that had a beginning, so neither can we think of any thing in him that shall ever have an end.” And elsewhere, the same reverend Father in his heavenly meditations and confessions speaks thus to God : “ S But if there was no time before heaven and earth, why should any one ask, what thou then didst"? For there was no then , where there was no time: neither wast thou before time in time ; for so thou wouldst not have been before all time. But thou art before all time e Tu in ccelo summam potestatem dividi credas ? et scindi veri illius ac divini imperii totam potestatem ? cum palam sit parentem omnium nec principium habere nec termi- num ; qui nativitatem omnibus praestat, sibi perpetuitatem, qui ante mundum fuerit sibi ipse pro mundo. Minut. Fel. in Octav. [xviii. 7.] f Deus solus est immutabilis, quia nihil praeteriti ei decedit, nihil futuri accedit: sed quicquid est vel fuit vel erit, totum sibi praesens adest: et sicut non potest cogitari quod aliquod initium habuerit, ita quoque non potest cogitari quod unquam finiri possit. August, [vol. VI.] de cognit. verae vitae, [Append.] c. 31. £ Si autem ante coelum et terram nullum erat tempus, cur quaeritur quid tunc faciebas ? Non enim erat tunc, ubi non erat tempus. Nec tu tempore tempora praecedis, alioquin non omnia tempora praecederes. Sed praecedis omnia tempora prae- terita celsitudine semper praesentis aeternitatis; et superas omnia futura, quia et ilia futura sunt, et cum venerint, praeterita erunt, Tu autem idem ipse es, et anni tui non deficient. Anni tui nec eunt nec veniunt: isti enim nostri et eunt et veniunt, ut omnes veniant. Anni tui omnes simul stant, quo- niam stant; nec euntes a venientibus excluduntur, quia non transeunt : Isti autem nostri omnes erunt, cum omnes non erunt. Anni tui dies unus; et dies tuus non quotidie sed hodie ; quia hodiernus tuus non cedit crastino, neque enim succedit hesterno: Hodiernus tuus aeternitas; ideo coaeternum genuisti, cui dixisti, Ego hodie genui te. Aug. [vol. I.] Confess. 1 . xi. c. 13. [ 1 . xi. 15, 16.] Of the Holy Trinity. Art.. past, in the height of eternity always present; and art above all things that are to come, because they are to come, and when they are come, will be gone. But thou art the same , and thy years shall ham no end; thy years do not go and come, but ours go and come, that they may all come. Thy years stand all together, because they always stand. Neither are they that go thrust out by them that come, because they do not pass away: but ours will all be, when they will not all be. Thy years are but one day, and thy day is not every day, but to-day. For thy to-day doth not give place to to¬ morrow for neither did it come into the place of yesterday. Thy to-day is eternity; therefore didst thou beget one coeternal with thyself to whom thou saidst, This day have 1 begotten thee .” Many other testimonies might be produced both from the Fathers and h others, but these are enough from whence to conclude as before from scripture and reason* that as there is but one living and true God ’, so this one living and true God is everlasting. Without body , parts , and passions. When we poor finite creatures set ourselves to consider of our infinite Creator, though we may apprehend something of him by ascribing all perfections to- him* yet more by removing" all imperfections from him. We cannot so well apprehend what he is, as what he is not. We can say indeed he is infinitely good, infinitely wise, in and of himself, eternal and all-sufficient: but alas! when we speak such words, we cannot apprehend the thing that is signified by them. Our understandings, being themselves finite, they cannot appre¬ hend what it is to be infinite, and as they are imperfect, they cannot conceive of any perfection, as it is in God. But now of imperfections we have the daily experience in ourselves, and therefore know the better how to abstract them all from our apprehensions of the Deity : and so the clearest h As the Sibyls, Orac. 1. 2. [p. 19. C.J ’AX A’ «uro9 avedeigtu ctlcovos avrus iavrou, Our a re kcil np\v four a. drop 7 r«At Kai piTtneira, Yea, it is one of the articles of the Jews’ faith, nnnNi 'ps p-inss *nm puno win noVir I believe perfectly, or with a perfect faith, that he is the first and the last. V. Maim, in Sanh. c. 10. I. Of the Holy Trinity. 25 apprehensions that we can have of him is by removing imperfections from him. I cannot conceive it, though I verily believe it, how he is of himself infinitely holy, just, and powerful; yet I can easily conceive how he is without body, parts, and passions ; that he is not such a one as I am, who have a body, am compounded of parts, and am subject to passions: but whatsoever he is in himself, be sure he is infinitely above such imperfections as these are. First, therefore, here it is said, he is 1 without body , that is, he is not made up of any material substance, but is a spirit, incorruptible, intangible, invisible, and indivisible ; that cannot be seen, felt, nor heard by bodily senses, nor cor¬ rupted or divided by any means whatsoever. Of whom therefore we are not to frame any picture or idea in our minds, but are still to apprehend him only as a God incom¬ prehensible : and if whilst we are meditating of him, any bodily shape presents itself to our thoughts, we are to remove it from him we are thinking ofi and conceive of him as without body: and Secondly, without parts too ; that is, without all mixture or composition whatsoever; whether of matter and form, as a man is compounded of soul and body ; or of subject and accident, as a wise man, of wisdom and a man; or of act and power, as any thing that is, but may not be, or is not, but may be; or of genus and differentia , as when a specifical difference restrains a general nature to a certain species contained under it; or lastly, of esse and essentia , as when a thing is said to be by its essence. When God is said to be without parts, all these compositions are removed from him, or denied to be in him, yea, the last and subtlest of i K «1 to Oelov (fiapev eivai daco- parov, ovx oti ecrriv aadoparov' (67 T(K€Lva yap danv 6 Qeos rf] avrov ova la, coanfp tov ado paros, ovtcos ofro)s’ K«i iv toIs dvdpaaiv' ov\ a>s tov Beov tout cor fteopdvov, aW' ijpoov Trjv rrepi avrov evvoiav avrois evdeiKvvpdvoov. Tovroy ovv rat Tponw ovopd^opev avrov aadoparov, Kalroi eldores avrov iireKeiva imap^ovTa tov dacopdrov, &>s tovtov drjpiovpydv. Justin, in Queest. Grsec. confut. quaest. 2. [p. 538. D.] 'Qaavrcos enudl] to pi] Kparda&ai vno tlvos tov Kpareladai ripulorepov danv, did tovto xaXovpev avrov aadoparov. Ibid. [p. 539. B.] 26 Of the Holy Trinity. Art. them all: so that God cannot be said to be by his essence, for then his essence would be one thing, and his being another: and therefore he cannot be said to be by his essence, but to be essence itself. And therefore when we think of God, we are not to apprehend him as made up of several parts, but as one most pure, simple, Divine essence, without all manner of parts whatsoever, yea, and Thirdly, without passions too ; that is, not subject to, nor capable of love, hatred, joy, grief, anger, and the like, as they daily arise in us imperfect creatures; but he is always the same immovable, unchangeable, impassible God : and there¬ fore in all our contemplations of the Divine essence, we are not to conceive him as one passionately rejoicing or grieving for any thing, as we do, but as a pure and perfect essence, without body, parts, and passions too; as appears from scripture, reason, and fathers. First, from scripture, which clearly asserts the great God to be without body, saying, God is a ' spirit , John iv. 24 ; and a spirit hath not flesh and bones , as a body hath, as our Saviour (who better knew the nature of a spirit than all our sceptical philosophers, that attribute matter to it, ever did, or can do) expressly tells us, Luke xxiv. 39. And to this purpose also it is said, To whom then will you liken God ? or what likeness will ye compare unto him? Isai. xl. 18. Whereas if God had a body, we might easily answer the prophet; he is of such or such a likeness or shape, for every body must have some shape or other. And therefore also doth Moses counsel the Israelites, that they do not make any graven image, any picture, or similitude of God k , Deut. i Ov tolvvv dvvarov irvevpa clkov- (ravra 7repLyeypapp.(vr)v (frvcriv evrv- irwcrai rfj biavo'iq r/ rpoirais, kcu aX- XoLccxreorLV viroK(ip(vr]v, r/ oXcos opoiav Ttj KTLcreL, uWu. irpos to dvcordr^p tciIs cvvoiais x a, P°v VTa > voepav ovalav (irdvayK.es evvoelv, direipov Kara 8v- vapiv, p.(ye6u direpidpurTOV, \povois rj aiooaiv dp,erpr]TOV, dcfidovov idv ('x ei koXwv. Basil, de Spirit. Sanct. c. 9. [vol. II. p. 3T1. C.] k Upon this place it is that the Jews build the third article of their faith, no bw rmosi po«D ’ix Fjun rpa id’x bbs nr© i 1 ? psn i. e. I verily believe that he (God) is not a body, neither can he be compre¬ hended with any bodily compre¬ hensions, neither is there any thing like unto Him. V. R. Joseph Albo in n'lpy "idd et Maim, in Sanh. cap. 10. I. Of the Holy Trinity. 27 iv. 12, 15, 16, 17, 18: which was the great sin the Romans were guilty of, and St. Paul reproves them for, Rom. i. 23. And the same scriptures that tell us he is without body, assure us also that he is without parts, if we understand quantitative or extensive parts. And that he is without all manner of parts and compositions whatsoever, the name Jehovah, which he gives unto himself, Gen. xv. 7, Amos ix. 6, and which he will not suffer to be given to any other being, plainly imports, signifying essence in the most pure, simple, and abstracted notion, that possibly can be conceived, from an Hebrew root that signifies to be: and therefore the word denotes such an essence as is of itself pure and simple essence, which God could not be, had he any parts what¬ soever, for then he would have his essence from them, and so would not so much as be of himself, much less essence itself. And therefore also we must conclude him to be without passions too, as well as parts; for if he be such a pure essence, yea, essence itself, it is impossible he should bo subject to any passions. But this, that he is without passions, appears more clearly from these words, God is not a man , that he should lie , nor the son of man that he should repent , Num. xxiii. 19. But most clearly of all in that Paul and Barnabas, to convince the people at Lystra that they were not Gods, but men, tell them, they were men of like passions , or 1 subject to passions , as well as they , Acts xiv. 14. And St. James useth the same argument to prove that Elias was a man too, James v. 17. Now had God been subject to passions, as well as men, the apostles would have been much 1 So the Syriac translates the Greek words, kcu 17/xeis opoioTraQtis eapeu vjxlv uvOpomoi by j (aXa-lo Et nos homines sumus passionibus obnoxii sicut et vos; implying, that if they were gods, to whom such worship ought to be performed, they would not have been subject to such passions as men are. And so where it is said, ’HAtar (lvdpa) 7 ros f/v 6 fioi(ma 6 r)s the same translation renders it £>j jocn Et Elias erat homo passionibus obnoxius sicut et nos. Jac. v. 17. As if he should have said, Elias was a man as well as we, as we may see, in that he was subject to passions as well as we; which, if lie had been God, he would not have been: and yet he prayed and prevailed with God, and why may not we ? 28 Of the Holy Trinity. Art. overseen in their logics, using an argument that would make as much against them as for them. I know the Anthropomorphitse, that fancied God to have a body, parts, and passions like to us, pretend much to scrip¬ ture to ground this their heresy upon ; because in scripture God is often said to have eyes, ears, feet, a mouth, bowels, back- parts ; as also to love, hate, mourn, rejoice, be angry, and the like. And it is true, such things as these are frequently attributed to God in holy scripture, but improperly, by a figure the schoolmen call A nthropopatheia . And the reason is because should God speak always of himself as he is in himself, we should not be able to understand him; and there¬ fore he fits his expressions to our apprehensions ; he speaks of things, not so much as they are in themselves, but as we are able to conceive of them. Therefore when he would make known himself to us, he speaks as a nurse to a child, who utters not her mind in complete sentences, but lisps it out in broken language, fitted to the shallow capacity of its tender years. Thus, I say, doth the great God speak in broken and imperfect language to us, making use of the names that we give to the several m parts of our bodies, and passions of our minds, to signify to us the Divine properties which are in himself, or the effects of them to us. Thus he useth the word eye , to signify his omniscience, because the eye is that part of the body whereby we see any thing; the word hand to express his power, because it is that whereby we do any thing : and thus doth he use also the words rejoicing , grieving , loving , hating , repenting , and the like, to denote something in him, which we cannot apprehend, but by the dark resem¬ blance, that these passions and affections that are in us have m Sed haec rursum non secundum errorem Judaeorum, vel etiam ex nost.ris nonnullorum, qui cum illis errant: eatenus dicitnus, ut quoniam humana fragilitas aliter audire de Deo non potest, nisi ut sibi res ipsa et vocabula nota sunt, idcirco etiam membris haec nostris siinilibus et habitu humano Deum agere sentia- mus. Alienum hocest ab ecclesias- tica fide. Sed hoc ipsum, quod vel aspirat in corde uniuscujusque sanc¬ torum, vel sonum vocis pervenire ad aures ejus facit, locutus homini Deus dicitur. Sic et cum nota esse sibi indicat quae unusquisque vel loquitur, vel agit, audisse se dicit; et cum aliquid injustum geri a nobis indicat, irasci se dicit: cum beneficiis suis ingratos nos arguit, paenitere se dicit: indicans quidem haec his affectibus, qui homimbus in usu sunt. Origen. in Gen. Horn. 3. [p. 9. A.] I. Of the Holy Trinity. 29 to it. His love denotes his eternal purpose and decree to reward virtue; his hatred and anger, his eternal purpose to punish vice ; and so repentance doth not signify any change in his essence or decree, but only in his "actions mutably decreed from eternity, that is, decreed to be changed upon such and such occasions and conditions. And therefore, though these things be spoken after the manner of men, we are to understand them as becomes the "majesty of God. And what scripture herein asserts, reason also consenteth to. For first, that God is without body, must needs be granted, for otherwise he would be finite, and so not God : for every body hath dimensions, every one of which is finite, and therefore can never make up an infinite body : or suppose we should fancy God to have a body infinite like himself, this body must be either the same with himself, and so he must be nothing but a body, (it being impossible that a body and spirit should both make up but one uncompounded substance,) and so not the first, nor indeed any cause at all, a mere body or matter being of itself incapable of action ; or else it must be really distinct from him, and if so, then either he must not be infinite, and so not God, or else there must be two infinites, which I have before convinced of absurdity. But that God hath no body, appeareth also in that he hath no parts ; parts necessarily accompanying every body. And that God hath no parts, or is not compounded P, is clear in that we cannot look upon God, but as a Being in and of himself most absolutely perfect, yea, as perfection and essence itself; incapable of receiving perfection from any thing, himself being the fountain, yea, perfection of all per¬ fections ; and therefore in Hebrew he hath called himself Schaddai , Gen. xvii. 1, that is, one of himself perfect and all-sufficient: whereas if he have any parts, it is from those parts, not from himself, that he receives perfection : whatsoever n Poenitentia Dei est ohcovopias, tere posse negatur. i Sam. xv. 29. i. e. dispensation^ mutatio. Theo- August. doret. Quaest. 50. Poenitentia Dei 0 This was Athanasius’s golden non est post errorem, sed poeni- rule, always to be observed, when tentia Dei dicitur rerum sub ejus parts or passions are attributed unto potestate constitutarum inopinata God, Tatrra avQpamoTraOcds pev Xe- mutatio. Alioqui certe Deum poeni- yovrcu, deonparoos voovvtcu'. 30 Of the Holy Trinity. Art. is compounded receiving its perfection from the parts it is compounded of, some perfection from one part, some from another, and all from all; and therefore wheresoever any part is lacking, the whole cannot be perfect. So that to say, God hath parts, is as much as to say, he is not of himself perfect, and so not God: and so also, if God be compounded of any thing, the parts he is compounded of being necessarily before himself that is compounded of them, he cannot be the first of beings, much less the first of causes: the parts being always in nature at least before the whole. And again, if we have parts, they are either finite or infinite ; infinite they cannot be, for then there would be more infinites than one : and there¬ fore if he have parts, these parts can be but finite ; and if so, himself that is compounded of them cannot be infinite: for many finites can never make one infinite Being, neither can any parts ever make the whole of an higher nature than themselves are, or howsoever, 0 so much higher as infinite is above finite : and therefore if God hath parts, he can be but finite, and so not God; and by consequence, if he be God, he must be acknowledged to be without parts. And that God is without passions, is also as clear as that he is without body and parts : for passion in its proper notion and notation implies suffering, which it is impossible for God, who is a most pure act, to be subject to. Again, in every passion, there is a motion or change in the subject wherein it is ; and therefore also it is called a passion , because the* subject suffers some change by it, sometimes loving, then hating, now rejoicing, then grieving, and the like ; so that there is some change in the subject, from what it was before. But now it is impossible there should be any such motion or change in God; for inconstancy and mutability are imperfec¬ tions, and therefore not to be admitted into the notion of a Deity. And further, if God should be moved or changed, it must be either from better to worse, from worse to better, or from equal to equal.' From better to worse he cannot be changed, for then he would be corrupted, and want some ° MS. not SO much . rov eavru>v \ 6 yov' 6 0 eos wv tern, V*AvOpamoi p,ev yap eK p.epa>v avy- Kal ov avvOeTos. Athanas. Oratio KeipevoL Ka\ €< to v fir) ovtos yevopevoi contra gent. [41.] fTvyKelpevov e^ovo-i Ka\ biaXvopevov 1. Of the Holy Trinity. 31 perfection after his change, which he had before, and so cease to be the chiefest good, and by consequence God ; which we have before shewed he cannot, being in and of himself eternal. From worse to better if he should change, before his change he was not God, because he wanted some perfec¬ tion or degree of goodness, which he hath after: after his change he would not be God, because he had a beginning, and so not eternal. From equal to equal also he cannot change, for then too he would not be God absolutely perfect, wanting some perfection before his change, which he had after, and some perfection after his change, which he had before. And lastly, if God should be moved, or changed, and by conse¬ quence be in passion any way, it must be either from some¬ thing without him, or from something within him : from any thing without him, it cannot be; for he is the First Cause, and so the first mover, by whom all other things are moved, and therefore who cannot be moved by any thing: from within he cannot be moved, for he hath not any parts, (as I have shewn,) whereof one can be the thing moving, and the other the thing moved, being in and of himself a most pure and simple act. And therefore we cannot but conclude from reason also, that God is without body , parts , and passions. And this was the doctrine of the ancient fathers. Ter- tullian q : “ Neither doth God stand in need of members, or of the offices of several parts, whose very tacit will hath all things present and subservient to it. For why should he desire eyes, who is light itself? or why should he require feet, who is every where ? or why should he go in any where, seeing there is nowhere that he can go out of himself ? or why should he desire hands, whose silent will effecteth all things ? neither can he want ears, who knoweth the very silent motions of the q Neque sunt ei aut membra, aut memborum officia necessaria, ad cujus solum etiamtaciturn arbitrium, et serviunt, et adsunt omnia. Cur enim requirat oculos, qui lux est ? aut cur quserat pedes, qui ubique est ? aut cur ingredi velit, cum non sit quo extra se progredi possit ? aut cur manus expetat, cujus ad omnia instituenda artifex est et silens voluntas ? Nec auribus eget, qui etiam tacitas novit voluntates. Tertull. deTrinitat. [p. 1237. B. ed. Pamelio, fol. Par. 1598. Est tamen Novatiani.] Of the Holy Trinity. Art. heart/ 1 And Origen : “ r For the Divine substance is simple or unmixed, neither compounded of' any members, or joints, or affections: but whatsoever is performed by the power of God, that men might understand it, it is either expressed by the names of human members, or else is declared by common and known affections. And after this manner is God said to be angry, to hear, or speak. 11 “ For s God is one whole Being, 11 saith Athanasius, “ not any parts, or made up of several parts, but himself is the maker of the compositions of all things: behold how impiously they speak of God, whilst they utter such things ! for if he be compounded of parts, he will appear altogether unlike unto himself, and would have his perfection from things unlike to one another. 11 And St. Augustine saith t, “ There are some, that presume to say, that God himself is altogether a body; thinking, that whatsoever is not a body cannot be a substance: such, I judge, ought utterly to be abhorred. 11 And elsewhere: “ u If our soul be not a body, how can God the creator of our soul be a body T 1 And as the ancient fathers apprehended God without body and parts, so without passions too. As St. Hilary : “ x But before we shew what that word of anger and perturbation of wrath is, it behoves me to admonish my hearers and readers, that they do not believe, that any changes of passions, or motion of affections can happen to God. For there is no new r Simplex namque est ilia sub¬ stantia, et neque membris ullis, neque compagibus, affectibusque composita: sed quicquid divinis virtutibus geritur, hoc, ut homines possent intelligere, aut humanorum membrorum appellatione profertur, aut communibus et notis annuncia- tur affectibus. Et hoc modo vel irasci, vel audire, vel loqui dicitur Deus. Orig. in Gen. Horn. 3. [p. 9 - B.] s O yap Qeos o\ov ecrri Ka\ ov pepr], v avveaTrjKev, dXX avrd? rfjs Trdvrcov cr vardaedos eari TTOLrjTTjs. Sea yap dcrrjv dal fie Lav Kara tov Seiov ravra Xeyovres e£rj- yovvrai ; el ycip e< p epd>v at weaTijKe, navTUis avros eavrov dvopoLos (J)avi 7 - aerai, Ka\ et- dvopoleov e^cov rr/v avp- icoaiu. Athanas. Orat. con. gent. Sunt enim quidam, qui Deum ipsum omnino corpus esse praesu- munt; putantes quicquid corpus non est, prorsus nullam esse sub- stantiam: istos omni modo aversan- dos censeo. Aug. [vol. II.] Epist. 112. ad Paulin. [49.] u Porro si noster animus corpus non est, quomodo Deus creator animi corpus est? Id. [vol. YII.] de civitate Dei, 1 . 8. c. 5. x At priusquam quis iste iree sermo, et quae haec indignationis perturba- tio sit, ostendamus, admoneri le- gentes atque audientes oportet, ne aliquas demutationes passionum, perturbationesque motuum cadere in Deum credant. Nihil enim in aeter- I. Of the Holy Trinity. 38 thing can come to that eternal and perfect nature; neither can he (who is so, that as he is now, he is always, lest some¬ time he should not be the same) be made to be any thing else than what he always is.” “ y That so,” as St. Augustine excellently, “ we may understand God, if we can, as much as we can, good without quality, great without quantity, the Creator without indigence, present without site, containing all things without habit, (or compass,) without place every where wholly, eternal without time, making changeable things without any change of himself, and suffering nothing at all ” And Athanasius in his dispute with Arius, concerning God's begetting of his Son: Arius tells him, “ he believed God was not mutable, nor subject to passions, and therefore how could he beget a Son V To whom Athanasius replies z , “ Neither do we believe that the Divine nature is subject to passions; but faithfully confess, that the Father, who is without passions, did, without passion of himself, who is God, beget the Son, who is God.” And Athenagoras shewing that the idols of the heathens were not gods, saith, “ a But if they should say, they are constituted only of flesh, and have blood, and seed, and are subject to the passions of anger and desire; such words also are to be accounted as trifles, and ridiculous : for there is neither anger, nor lust, nor desire, nor prolific seed in God.” And therefore we conclude, that as there is but one God, and this one God is everlasting, so is this one everlast¬ ing God, without body, parts, and passions. nam illam et perfectam naturam novum incidit: neque qui.ita est, ut qualis est, talis et semper est, ne ali- quando non idem sit, potest effici aliquod aliud esse, quam semper est. Hil. Enar. in Ps. 2. [13.] y Ut sic intelligamus Deum, si possumus, quantum possumus, sine qualitate bonum, sine quantitate magnum, sine indigentia creatorem, sine situ proesentem, sine habitu (vel ambitu) omnia continentem, sine loco ubique totum, sine tem¬ pore sempiternum, sine ulla sui mu- tatione mutabilia facientem, nihilque patientem. Aug. [vol. VIII.] de Trinitat. 1 . 5. c.. 1. [2.] BEVERIDGE. z Sed neque nos passionum con- ditionibus aivinam credimus subja- cere naturam; sed impassibilem patrem impassibiliter ex seipso, id est, ex Deo, Deum, quod ipse est, filium generasse fideliter confitemur. Athanas. disput. contra Arium Lao- dic. hab. [vol. II. p.637. A., where we read not ex Deo Deum but de eo.~] a K alroi el aapKoeLdels povov eXeyov avTOvs K.a\ alfia ey^etv, Kal cnreppa, Kal TrciOr) bpyps Kal em8v plus' Kal Tore edei Xr/pov, Kal yeXi otos Ad-you? tov- tovs vopl^eiv’ 0VT6 ycip opyp, ovt em.6vp.ia Kal ope^is, ovde iraiboTVoiov crneppa ev rw 6ea>. Athenag. leg. pro Christianis, [21.] D 34 Of the Holy Trinity. Art. Of infinite power , wisdom , and goodness. Having seen what God is not, we are now to consider what he is: when we speak of imperfections, he is utterly destitute of them, but as for perfections they are all infinite in him; he is without body, without parts, and without passions; but of infinite power, of infinite wisdom, and of infinite goodness. He is of infinite power, so as to do whatsoever is possible to be done : of infinite wisdom, so as to know whatsoever is possi¬ ble to be known : and of infinite goodness, so as to be more goodness in himself, than can possibly be conceived of by us. First, he is of infinite power, so as to be able to do what¬ soever is possible to be done. I say, whatsoever is possible to be done; for whatsoever is impossible to be done, is not within the verge of any power; and so God may have all power, though he cannot do it. Now there is nothing thus in itself impossible, and so nothing that God cannot do, but what in itself implies a contradiction, either directly or conse¬ quentially. 1st. Directly; as for a thing to be and not to be; to be made, and not to be made : such words as these do in their plain sense and signification directly contradict, and so destroy each other. Sndly. Consequentially; as that one body at the same time should be in two places, or two bodies at the same time should be in one place : such propositions as these are, though they do not directly and in plain terms imply it, yet they lead one infallibly into a contradiction. So for God to lie, to deny himself, to die, and the like, though the words be not contradictory, yet the sense is: for to say God lies, God denies himself, God dies, are all in effect as much as to say, God is not God. For these are all imperfec¬ tions, and therefore was God subject to them, he would not be God. And so he is omnipotent b though he cannot do them: nay, if he could do them, he would be impotent, not omnipotent, because to do any thing that argues imperfection b Si volunt invenire, quod omni- rum esse promisit. August, [vol. potens non potest, habent prorsus, VII.] de civit. Dei, 1. 22. c. 25. ego dicam, mentiri non potest. Cre- Ergo creditis Deo omnipotenti, qui damus ergo quod potest, non cre- posse ipsius non potest invenire non dendo quod non potest. Non itaque posse : tamen aliqua non potest, ut- credentes quod mentiri possit, cre- pote falli, fallere, mentiri, ignorare, xlant esse facturum quod se factu- initium et finem habere, non praevi- I. Of the Holy Trinity. 35 doth not proceed from omnipotence but impotence, or want of power to keep himself from being imperfect. Whereas God being so potent as not to be able to be imperfect or impotent is a greater argument that he is omnipotent, so omnipotent as that he cannot be impotent or imperfect, so omnipotent that he cannot but be omnipotent. So that he is so far from being impotent that he is the more c omnipotent because he cannot do these things. And this I look upon as the reason why such things as imply contradictions are not possible to be done, because that one part of a contradiction being true, the other must needs be false, and therefore should God work that which any ways implies a contradiction, he would neces¬ sarily work that which is falsed and untrue, and therefore that which is contrary, yea, contradictory to his own essence, who is truth itself, and so destroy himself: which if he be God, it is a contradiction that he should be able to do, for if he was able to do that, he would not be God, because capable of destruction. So that for God to be able to do that which implies a contradiction, doth itself imply a contradiction. And to ask whether God be able to do that which im¬ plies a contradiction, is the same as if we should ask, whether God be able to destroy himself, to cease to be God, and to become impotent, or of a finite power, which that he should not be able to do, is not from any want, but from the e perfection of his power and omnipotence: so that dere, praeterita oblivisci, praesentia non attendere, futura nescire, ad ul- timum negare seipsum non potest. Ecce quanta non potest; et tamen omnipotens est, quamvis superius comprehensa non potest. Hem. i. de symb. apost. ascript. S. Chrysost. [Opp. Lat. fol. Par. 1588. vol. V. p. 614. C.] c Deus omnipotens est, et cum sit omnipotens mori non potest, falli non potest, mentiri non potest, et quod ait Apostolus mentiri seipsum non potest; quoniam multa non potest et omnipotens est, et ideo omnipotens est quia ista non potest. Aug. [vol.VI.] de symb. ad catech. 1. 1. c. 1. [i. 2. d Hence saith St. Augu -tine; Quisquis itaque dicit, si omnipotens est Deus, faciat, ut quae facta sunt, facta non fuerint, non videt hoc se dicere, si omnipotens est, faciat ut quae vera sunt, eo ipso quod vera sunt, falsa sint. Aug. [vol. VIII.] contra Faust. 1 . 26 . c. 5. e St. Ambrose herein expresseth my meaning very clearly. Nun- quidnatn mentitur Deus? Sed non mentitur, quia impossibile est men¬ tiri Deum. Impossibile quoque istud, nunquidnam infirmitatis est ? non utique; nam quomodo omnia potest, si aliquid efficere non potest? Quid ergo ei impossibile ? Non quod virtuti arduum, sed quod na¬ turae ejus coutrarium. Impossibile, inquit, est ei mentiri. Impossibile 8G Of the Holy Trinity . Art. he would be less powerful if he could do them, and he is more powerful because he cannot do them; his doing them would argue f impotence, but his not doing them testifies his somnipo¬ tence. If he was not omnipotent he would be able to do them, for he is therefore only unable to do them because h omnipotent. Though we need not have gone so far, neither to have rescued the truth of God's omnipotence from the scandal of impotence, because not able to do what implies a contradiction; for seeing every contradiction is in itself an impossibility, and every impossibility is in itself a contradic¬ tion to all power; it is no derogation from the infiniteness of God's power not to be able to do them; our meaning, when we say God is omnipotent, or of infinite power, being no more than to say, he is able to do whatsoever himself willeth 1 or pleaseth, (but it is impossible he should please to do what implies a contradiction, for then he would will what is false, istud non infirmitatis est, sed virtutis et majestatis; quia veritas non re- cipit mendacium, nec Dei virtus levitatis errorem. Ideoque sit Deus verax, omnis autem homo mendax. Veritas itaque semper in eo est : fidelis manet; mutare se et negare non potest. Si enim verum se ne- gat, mentitur: mentiri autem non virtutis, sed infirmitatis est. Nec mutare se potest, quia natura ejus non recipit infirmitatem. Hoc igi- tur impossibile ejus plenitudinis est, quae minuere se et augere non potest; non infirmitatis, quae in eo quod se auget, imbecilla est. Ex quo colligitur impossibile Dei po- tentissimum esse. Ambros. Epist. 37. [ep. 50. p. 993. vol. II.] f Postremo omnipotens est ad facienda omnia, quae facere voluerit. Nam ego dico quanta non possit. Non potest mori, non potest peccare, non potest mentiri, non potest falli. Tanta non potest: quae si posset, non esset omnipotens. Serm. de temp. 213. ascript. August. [vol.V.] S IloXXa to'lvvv evpi]Kapev ddvvciTa to) navTodvvapo) deco’ ciXXci to prj dvvrjOrjval tl tovtcop dnelpov dvpdpecos, ovk dicrSepelcis TeKprjpiop * to de ye dvprjOrjvai, udvpap[as drjnovdep, ov dvpapecos. Theodoret. dialog. 3. c.4. [p. 123. B. vol. IV.] h Neque enim et vitam Dei et praescientiam Dei sub necessitate ponimus, si dicamus, necesse est Deum semper vivere et cuncta prae- scire : sicut nec potestas ejus minui- tur, cum dicitur mori fallique non posse. Sic enim hoc non potest, ut potius, si posset, minoris esset uti- que potestatis. Recte quippe omni¬ potens dicitur, qui tamen mori et falli non potest. Dicitur enim om¬ nipotens faciendo quod vult, non patiendo quod non vult: quod si ei accideret, nequaquam esset om¬ nipotens. Unde propterea quaedam non potest, quia omnipotens est. August, [vol. VII.] de civit. Dei, I.5. c. 10. [1.] Vid. de Symb. ad Catech. 1 . 1. c. 1. 1 Qui certe non ob aliud vocatur omnipotens nisi quod quicquid vult potest. August, [vol. VII.] de civ. Dei, I.21. c. 7. [1.] Dicitur enim omnipotens faciendo quod vult, non patiendo quod non vult. Ibid. 1. 5. c. 10. [1.] And therefore saith Ter- tullian, Deo nihil est impossibile, nisi quod non vult. Tertul. [vol. III.] de carne Christi, c. 3. I. Of the Holy Trinity. 37 which he being truth itself, it is a contradiction he should do,) and whatsoever is in itself such as that it may be done, and so can be the object of any power: for that which is not within the reach of any power, is not necessary to be the object of God's power, without which we coidd not call him an all-powerful God. For though he cannot do that which no power can do, yet he can do all that any power can do, and that is sufficient to denominate him an all-powerful God, or one of infinite power, beyond whom no power can go. And as he is of infinite power, so is he of infinite wisdom too, so as to know whatsoever is possible to be known, as well as to do whatsoever is possible to be done. Gut when we speak of the wisdom or knowledge, we are not to measure it by our understandings and apprehensions of things, who know nothing, but only by species or certain notions ab¬ stracted from the things themselves; whereas God knows all things by his own essence, for he knew all things from eternity, and therefore before there was any thing, but his own essence to know any thing by: which notwithstanding, being the most perfect idea of all things possible, was suffi¬ cient to represent all things to himself, without any thing whatsoever distinct from himself. And again, we can have the actual knowledge only of one thing at a time, in whom the faculty, habit, and act of knowledge are three distinct things: but in God they are all the same thing ; who knows all things in himself, being all things to himself; and there¬ fore knows not things by succession one after another, or by discourse of reason, as we do; but he with k one simple and eternal act knows all things possible to be known, that is, all things whatsoever. And the reason is clear, for the know¬ ledge of God is the very essence of God, and therefore as the essence of God is but one, the knowledge of God can be but one: so that succession is as competible to his essence as to k Qui non singula cogitando as- igitur praeteritum et futurum deest. picit, sed una aeterna et immutabili Apud Deum autem nihil deest: nee atque ineffabili visione compleetitur praeteritum igitur nee futurum, sed cuncta quae novit. Aug. de Trinit. omne praesens est apud Deum. Id. 1 . 15. c. 8. [vol. VIII. 1 . 15. 13.] de 83. quaest. quaest. 17. de scientia Omne praeteritum jam non est; Dei. [vol. VI. p. 4.] omne futurum nondum est: omne 38 Of the Holy Trinity. Art. his knowledge : but that there can be no such thing in his essence as succession of parts, nor by consequence in his knowledge as first and last, is plain, in that his essence (and so his knowledge) is eternal, yea, eternity itself, which ex¬ cludes all possibility of succession. Again, if God should know one thing after another, what he knows at one time, he would not actually know at another; but when he hath the actual knowledge of one thing, he would have but only the power of knowing other things, and so would be compounded of act and power, and by consequence would not be absolutely simple, which notwithstanding that he is, we have proved before. And thus it is that we say God is of infinite wisdom. Lastly, he is of infinite goodness too, as well as of infinite power and wisdom : where by being of infinite goodness, we are to understand that he is a God infinitely desirable by us, being infinitely amiable in himself: the bottomless ocean of all goodness in himself, and an overflowing fountain of good¬ ness unto us. So that whatsoever good we do enjoy, we receive from him ; whatsoever good we can desire, we may have in him. And herein consisteth the right notion of good¬ ness, even in the relation that it bears to us by being conve¬ nient for us, and therefore desirable by us. And in this sense is God, and God only, said to be of infinite goodness, that is, such a one of whose convenience to us, and desirable¬ ness by us, there is no bounds or limits; but let him be as much as may be desired by us, he is still more desirable in himself. And for the proof of all this we shall first consult the scrip¬ tures. First, that he is a God of infinite power is certain from scripture, for he is God Almighty , Gen. xxxv. 11 . He is ivise in heart , and mighty in strength: who hath hardened himself against him and prospered? Job ix. 4. Canst thou by searching find out God ? canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection ? chap. xi. 7. As if he should say, Canst thou find out the bounds and limits of his power and greatness ? canst thou tell where it will end and be perfected ? is not he infinite in power? Yea, he can do every thing , Job xlii. 2. Yea, he hath done whatsoever he pleaseth, Psalm cxv. 3. And the reason is, because with God nothing shall be unpossible , Luke i. 37. I. Of the Holy Trinity. 39 With men this is impossible; but with God all things are pos¬ sible, Matt. xix. 26. And that he is of infinite wisdom also is plain. For he is the only wise God , 1 Tim. i. 17 ; Rom. xvi. 27; Jude 25. He knoweth all things, John xxi. 17; 1 John iii. 20. Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight; for all things are naked and opened to the eyes of him with whom ice have to do, Heb. iv. 13. For there is not a word in my tongue, but lo, 0 Lord, thou Jcnowest it altogether . Whither therefore shall I go from thy Spirit, or whither shall I flee from thy presence ? If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there : if I make my bed in hell, behold thou art there , &c. Psalm cxxxix. 4, 7, 8, &c.; and why so, but because he is of infinite wisdom, or as himself saitli, his understanding is infinite , Ps. cxlvii. 5. Lastly, for his goodness, it is called great goodness, Ps. cxlv.7. He is good to all, and his mercy is over all his works, ver. 9. Yea, there is none good but God, Mark x. 18; Luke xviii. 19. None essentially, none originally, none infinitely good but God. Therefore doth David cry out, whom have I in heaven but thee ? neither is there any upon earth my sold desires besides thee. Psalm lxxiii. 25. And if he be thus the centre of all our desires, he must needs be the perfection of all goodness, or as it is here expressed, a God of infinite goodness. The scripture being so plentiful, I need not be prolix in producing reasons to back this truth; especially itself being so clear, that none that hath the right understanding of it can deny subscription to it. For if I say God is God, it will necessarily follow, that he is of infinite wisdom, power, and .goodness: for all these are perfections, which it is impossible for us to abstract from the notion of a Deity. And not only the things themselves, but the infinitude of them is a perfec¬ tion also, without which God would be imperfect, and so not God. Again, wisdom, power, and goodness, being all perfec¬ tions, are necessary properties in God, and so the very essence of God; it being impossible for God to be God, and yet to have any thing in him which is not himself; and therefore his essence being infinite, (as it must be if it be the essence of God,) these his properties cannot but be infinite too. And these reasons serve to prove in general, that all these perfections of power, wisdom, and goodness, are infinitely in 40 Of the Holy Trinity. Art. God; we shall now consider them distinctly. And first, as for his power, reason cannot but grant him to be the First Cause or cause of all causes, and therefore must needs ac¬ knowledge him to have all power in his hand ; so that nothing can be possible which he cannot do, and therefore he must needs be able to do all things that are possible. Nay, we cannot so properly say God can do any thing because it is possible, as therefore is any thing possible because God can do it; for the possibility of any thing's being done, is grounded merely upon God's power and ability to do it: so that the possibility of any thing's being done, as well as the thing itself that is thus possible to be done, must depend upon God as the first cause ; otherwise, there would be some¬ thing in the world which he would not be the cause of. And if to this we consider what God hath or can do, we shall easily grant him to be of infinite power : for God can make any thing of m nothing, as when he made the world, and all the creatures in it of no preexisting matter; he can make nothing of any thing, there being no greater power required to make any thing nothing, than there is to make nothing any thing: yea, he can make any thing of any thing; of stones he can raise up children to Abraham; and all this he can do with means, or without means, or with contrary means, howsoever, whensoever, wheresoever himself pleaseth : so that one thing is not n easier or harder to him than another; a whole army is no more able to resist him than a silly fly; he can as easily make ten thousand worlds as one, and any thing in the world as easily as we can think a thought. For he doth but will any thing to be done, and in himself say fiat, and immediately whatsoever his will is should be done, m Et outcos eanv 77 v\rj dyevrjros cos 6 Qeos, kciL dvvarai 6 Qeos A tov diyevrjTov jvoirjcral n, dr/Xov o>y bvvarcu 6 Qeos ex tov cnrXcos jir) ovtos noiTjaai ti. Justin, in Aristot. Dogmat. evers. [p. 558.] n Sed omnipotens manus tua, cui omnia sunt pari modo possibilia. Nec enim possibilius est creare ver- miculum, quam angelum; nec hn- possibilius est extendere coelum quam folium; nec levius formare capillum, quam corpus; nec diffici- lius fundare terram super aquas, quam aquas super terram : sed om¬ nia qusecunque voluit fecit, in ccelo et in terra, et in mari et in omnibus abyssis, et me inter omnia sicut vo¬ luit, potuit et scivit. Aug. Soliloq. animse ad Deum, cap. 9. [vol. VI. App. p. 89.] I. Of the Holy Trinity. 41 gathers up itself' out of nothing, or some preexisting matter, as himself pleaseth, and becomes just what himself willed should be. And what is, if this be not, to be of infinite power \ Neither can reason discover less of the infinitude of his wisdom than power. For, he being the First Cause, his wisdom must needs be answerable to his power; otherwise let his power be never so great, yet of himself he could do nothing. For if he be not as wise as powerful, what he doth must either be done by chance, or by the direction of another: if by chance, then he is not the First Cause, for that is always a necessary, never an accidental cause; if by the direction of another, wanting wisdom in himself, then he would not be the First Cause neither, but rather an instrument in the other's hand to do what he pleaseth: so that to be the First Cause, infinite wisdom is required also, as well as infinite power: and not only to be the First Cause, but to be of infinite power, it is also necessary that he be of infinite wisdom, it being impos¬ sible for him to do more than he knows: and therefore if his wisdom and knowledge be not, his might and power cannot be infinite; especially considering that impotence, or want of power to know all things, is itself a contradiction to omnipo¬ tence in doing all things; this being one thing, which omni¬ potence must be able to do, or not be omnipotence, even to know all things. Lastly, reason also is as confident in attributing goodness, as wisdom and power, to the Deity; nay therefore because it attributes infinite wisdom and power, it cannot but attribute infinite goodness also to him: for he that is infinitely wise and powerful in himself, cannot but be infinitely good; wisdom and power being two perfections much to be desired, and therefore such things as we cannot but term good; the very nature of goodness consisting in desirableness. Again, he that is the chiefest good must needs be of infinite good¬ ness ; for otherwise, other things may be as good as he, and then he would not be the chiefest good. Now that God is the chiefest good, is certain; for otherwise he would have some other above him: if lie be not in all things, and so in goodness too, supreme, he must have a superior, or howso- 4 2 Of the Holy Trinity. Art. ever an equal, and so himself would not be the first and prime cause, and so not God. But I need not expatiate upon these things, for he that is infinite in one perfection cannot but be so in all: and therefore goodness being a perfection, yea perfection itself, (for goodness and perfection are convert¬ ible terms,) he cannot but be of infinite goodness, as well as of infinite power and wisdom. And if we inquire of the Fathers concerning these perfec¬ tions in God, Justin tells us°, “God hath not a measured power; therefore to him there is nothing but what is fit to produce whatsoever he pleaseth; neither doth the cutting in pieces nor burning of bodies hinder him, that he cannot raise them up again. For God doth not work by the law and measure of nature, but by the power of his own will, which wanteth nothing to produce what he pleaseth A And Ter- tullianP; “ They do not know God aright, that do not think that he can do what they do not think. 11 And, “ ( l There is nothing difficult to God: who doth not know it ? And the things that are impossible with men are possible with God ; who is ignorant of it? and God chose the foolish things of this world to confound the wise : all this we have read. 11 And again, “ r Truly there is nothing difficult to God ; but if we use this assertion so abruptly in our presumptions, we might feign any thing of God, as if he hath done it because he can do it. But because he can do all things, we are not therefore to believe that he did that also which he never did; but we must inquire, whether he did it or no. 11 And Origen; ° 'O 8e Geo? ovk epperpov T h v bvvapiv’ 8id tovto ovdep avrcp ecrrlv avenirr/beiov rrpbs noirjcnv irdvrcov hv ftovXercu, ov8e KooXverai vnb rr/s roprjg Kelt KCtvtTecos tcov aozpdireov tov nouj- cr cut Oca uvtwv ttjv dvdcrracnv. ov ycip vdpcp n»"a rrbi’ and I created man upon it, Isa. xlv. 12. so that creating of man and forming of man is the same thing : and therefore also saith the Targum elsewhere siirmi QiNb nd'TQ p Man that is created of the dirt; Job xxx. 19 : and p 'rminx {•nsj? I was created of the dust; Ps. lxxxix. 48. So that a thing may be N“i 23 created of some preexistent matter as well as nothing, and there¬ fore Nin cannot always denote the production of any thing out of nothing. h There are but two Hebrew words that offer at it, and they are ‘jm and * 72 n; both which, I must confess, mostly, if not always, are translated world: but properly they denote not the universal, but only the habitable world, even so much of the universe as is inhabited. As for the first, viz. bin, it is made use of but once in all the Bible; and that is Isai. xxxviii. 11. I shall not behold man more bin ui'V □!' with the inhabit¬ ants of the world, as we render it; but the Targum tn-iR ’in' the in¬ habitants of the earth; the Arab. any of them that dwell in it, viz. in the earth before spoken of. Whence we see that the most ancient interpreters took bin and to be synonymous terms. And truly from this place it cannot (nor by consequence from any) be proved, that this word sig¬ nifies any more than the habitable world, the inhabitants of it being here spoken of. But the more usual word that is rendered world, is ban; I. Of the Holy Trinity. 49 other languages have, to join these two words, heaven and earth, together, and under them to comprehend the whole circumference of all created beings; which we call the world or universe. And there is no place of scripture where they come together, but they are to be taken in that comprehen¬ sive sense. And in this God himself seems to be his own in¬ terpreter, who in one place saith, in six days he made heaven and earth , Exod. xxxi. 17; in another place, that in six days he made heaven and earth , the sea , and all that in them is, Exod.xx.il. And St. Paul most excellently, not only ex¬ plains the phrase, but confirms the truth, saying, that by him were all things created , that are in heaven , and that are in earth , visible and invisible , whether they be thrones , or dominions , or principalities , or powers: all things were created by him , and for him , Col. i. 16. Which place being itself so clear, plain, and full a proof of it, I need not produce any more to prove that God is the maker of all things , visible and invisible. Neither do the scriptures testify his creation only, but his preservation also of all things in the world. For we did not only at the first receive our beings from him, but even now, in him we live , move, and have our being. 'Acts xvii. 28. And made use of very frequently, but never to signify any more than the habitable world neither as *nn; and therefore is it still translated by the Septuagint, oiKovpevrj. The Chald. Ps.ix. 9. renders it si'ist noj> the people of the earth j the Arabic ! habitata, habitabilis; the habitable part of the world. So also Psal. xviii. 16. and xcviii. 7. and elsewhere. The Syr. always retains the Hebrew word \ \ .^> j/ The Rabbins contracted the signification of it still narrower than the habitable world, making it to signify no more than the land of Israel; whence R. Salomon speaking of Van saith, N’rr mi son n^na N'mc yns nmn Ilia est terra Israelis, quae condita est praeceptis multis, in Isa. xxiv. 4. and these words coming short, there is no word in Hebrew so comprehensive as to signify the whole world. Neither indeed had BEVERIDGE. the Grecians any such word until Pythagoras’s time; who seeing the wonderful order of all things, called the compages of all creatures KoV- pos. So Plutarch, Ilvdayopas 7 rpu>~ tos covopacre tt)v tcov oXcov nepiof]V, Koapov, ck tt)s ev avrco rdijecos. De placit. philos. 1 . 2. c. 1. [vol. IV. p. 379.] and from hence did the Latins call it mundus. * *Ei/ avrco yap £copev Kal KivovpeOa Kal e'crpev. cocrnep ev crcopariKcp vi to- beiypan, cos dbvvarov dyvorjcrai tov aepa 7 ravra^ov Ke^vpevov, Kal ov pa- Kpav defy evos exdcrrov r/H-dyv vnap- ^ovra, paXXov be Kal ev r)ri v ^wra, ovtco drj Kal tov tcov oXcov dijpiovpyov Oeov. Trap avrov yap ecrriv ijplv to eivai, to evepyeiv, to pr) dnroXecrOai. Glcumen. in loc. [vol. I. p. 138 .] And Theophylaet, T rjv npovoiav av¬ rov Xeyet Kal tt)v crvyKpoTTjcriv to eivai nap avrov, to evepyeiv, to pi) dnoXecrdai. [p. 153*] E 50 Of the Roly Trinity. Art. not only we, but all things in the world are as well preserved by him, as at the first they received their beings from him: what David saith of some we may apply to all creatures; These wait all upon thee; that thou mayest give them their meat in due season. That thou givest them they gather: thou openest thine hand , they are filled with good. Thou hidest thy face , they are troubled: thou takest away their breath , they die , and return to their dust. Thou sendest forth thy spirit , they are created: thou renewest the face of the earth , Psalm civ. 27—30. Psalm cxlv. 15. It is he who covereth the heavens with clouds , who prepareth rain for the earth , who maketh grass to grow upon the mountains. He giveth to the beast his food , and to the young ravens which cry , Psalm cxlvii. 8, 9. It is he who giveth us richly all things to enjoy , 1 Tim. vi. 17. It is he who stretch- eth out the north over the empty place , and hangeth the earth upon nothing. He bindeth up the waters in his thick clouds; and the cloud is not rent under them , Job xxvi. 7, 8, &c. It is he that maketh his sun to rise upon the evil and upon the good , and sendeth rain upon the just and upon the unjust , Matt. v. 45. Without whom not so much as a sparrow shall fall on the ground. By whom the hairs of our heads are numbered , Matt, x. 29, 30. In a word, it is he that upholdeth all things by the word of his power k , Heb. i. 3 : without whom therefore nothing in the world could stand; but all things would immediately fall down into their first nothing. So closely do the scriptures hold forth God as the maker and preserver of all things visible and invisible. And though some of the ancient naturalists have been thought to assert the eternity of the world, as 1 Aristotle; k Nomen filii Dei magnum et im- mensum est, et totus ab eo susten- tatur orbis. Hermee discip. Paul. 1. 3. [§. 14. p. 75.] 1 That Aristotle asserted the eter¬ nity of the world is plain, in that he states the question in the tenth chap¬ ter of his first book de Ccelo : Aeyco- pev pera ravra norepov ayevrjros r/ yevrjros, kcu a(f)6apTOS rj (frOapros (6 ovpavos) [lib. i. c. io.] And then having handled the.question in that, he concludes in the beginning of the next book, 'On pev ovv ovre yeyovev 6 7 ras ovpavos, ovre ferai Te r ^ v dprjpevoov egecrTi \aj3e7v tt)v 7tIcttlv. [lib. 2. c. i.] And this opinion of Ari¬ stotle concerning the eternity of the world, is both cited and refuted by Lactantius. Aristoteles autem (saith he) labore se et molestia liberavit. I. Of the Holy Trinity. 51 and others to deny an universal providence; either holding all things to fall out by chance, as the Epicureans, or else from a fatal necessity, without the concurrent providence of a Deity, as the Stoicks; yet we cannot thence conclude it beyond the reach of reason, to find the contrary to be true. Nay, cer¬ tainly if we pass our judgment upon creation and providence from the certain conclusions of unbiassed reason, without hav¬ ing respect to the scriptures at all, it can be no other than that God is as really the maker and preserver of all things, as he is God. For first, unless he made all things, how can he be termed the First Cause, or by consequence God ? unless he be the cause of all causes, how can he be termed the First Cause ? and unless he be the cause of all things, how can he be the cause of all causes? And therefore if there be any thing he is not the cause of, or which he did not make, how is he the cause of all things ? No certainly, to say he made not all things, is as much as to say he is not the First Cause, as really as to say he is not the First Cause, is as much as to say, he is not God. Again, unless God made all things, there is something in the world that was either made by itself, by some other person besides God, or else it was never made at all. To say any thing was made by itself is a contradiction; for then it would be and not be at the same time: it would not be, because not made; it would be, because it could make itself; it being impossible for any thing to act which doth dicens, semper mundum fuisse: ita- que et humanum genus, et csetera, quae in eo sunt, initium non habere, sed fuisse semper, et semper fore. Sed cum videamus singula quaeque animalia, quae ante non fuerant, in- cipere esse, et esse desinere: ne- cesse est totum genus aliquando esse ccepisse, et aliquando desitu- rum esse, quia coeperit. Lactant. de orig. error, c. [n. vol. I. p. 161.] And besides Aristotle, Heraclitus Ephesius also held the eternity of the world, koct/iov tov avrov cmav- roiv oxjt€ ns 6ecov ovre dvOpconoov e7roir)(T€V, aXXd rjv del Kai e’crri v, apud Clem. Alex. Strom. 1 . [5. p. 711.] And Pliny, Mundum, et hoc quod nomine alio ccelum appellare libuit cujus circumflexu teguntur cuncta, numen credi par est, aeternum, im- mensum, neque genitum neque in- teriturum unquam; [vol. I. 1. ii. c. 1.] But Lucretius elegantly refutes it; h 5- [3 2 5-] Praeterea, si nulla fuit genitalis origo Ten-arum et cceli, semperque aeterna fuere: Cur supera helium Thebanum, et fu- nera Trojae, Non alias alii quoque res cecinere poetae ? Quo tot facta virum toties cecidere ? nec usquam yEternis famae monimentis insita flo- rent ? Verum, ut opinor, habet novitatem summa, recensque Natura est mundi. E 2 52 Of the Holy Trinity. Art. not exist. If it was made by any other person besides God, either there must be two infinites, (which I have proved im¬ possible,) or else a finite power must be able to make any thing of nothing, which is impossible also; for upon that very account, because it can make any thing of nothing, it is infi¬ nite : for that which can make any thing of nothing, can do any thing at all, there being nothing harder to be done than that; because there cannot be a greater distance betwixt any two things, than there is betwixt any thing and nothing, the one being immediately contradictory to the other. And he that can do the hardest thing that is possible to be done, cannot have any bounds or limits of his power, and therefore must needs be infinite. Thus there can be nothing in the world made of itself, or by any other person besides God: it remains therefore, that it was either never made at all, or else made by God. That there should be any thing in the world besides God never made at all, is impossible; for then God would not be the cause of all things besides himself, and so not God. Again, if there be any thing in the world besides God, that was never made, it must needs be eternal as God himself: for if it was never made, it had no beginning; if it had no beginning, it must needs be eternal. Now it is impossible any thing should be eternal as God, and not be God; for absolute eternity is a perfection, and therefore cannot but be acknowledged an essential property in God^ and so the very essence of God; which therefore no person can have but he that hath the essence of God, which to say any but God can have, is a con¬ tradiction. This also would quite destroy that old axiom, m that every thing that is or hath any being, is either the Creator or a creature: so that unless it be the Creator, it is a creature; and if it be not a creature, it is a Creator: which likewise was grounded upon a certain truth, that there must be some First Cause upon which all other causes, and m Kai npcorov ye ra ovra diaiprj- cropev' evprjcropev yap e’ls re ktkttov Kai (iktkttov ra Travra hiaipovpeva. Ei ri yap ccttlv iv tol s ovaiv, r) uktl- (ttos (pvcris eorrlv, rj ktkttt]. Justin. Expos, fid. [4. p. 422.] # Ei> eVro yivcocrKcov, on dia tovto ctv avros ovk ei Qeos rrj (jovcrei, eneidr) Krccrpa Qeov, cos 6i prj rjs Kricrpa, Qeos av f/s rfj cjovcrei. Athanas. contra Macedon. dialog. 1. [14. vol. II. p. 55 i] I. Of the Holy Trinity. 53 so things necessarily depend; which, if there be any thing neither the Creator nor the creature, neither the First Cause itself nor dependent upon the First Cause, is a manifest un¬ truth : which, if granted, would make all the logic and reason of all the philosophers in the world to be but dreams and fancies. But that it is not a falsity, but a real truth, such a truth, as that the denying of it will force us into a contradic¬ tion, I have proved before. Having proved the great God to be the maker of all things, I need not heap up many arguments to prove he is the pre¬ server also of all that he hath made. For the principal reasons which may be brought for the one, may be produced for the other too. The great reason why God must be acknowledged the maker of all things, is, because he cannot but be acknow¬ ledged the First Cause. And if he be the First Cause, it as necessarily follows that he preserves all things now, as that he made them all at the first. For though he did make all things, and so was the First Cause of all things; yet he can¬ not be said to be the cause of all things now, unless he pre¬ serves them, as well as made them. For not only at the beginning of the world, but even now, there are and will be several causes in the world, till the end of it, all which must necessarily depend upon one another, and therefore at the length come to some First Cause, that hath all other causes depending upon it; itself depending upon nothing. Now un¬ less God hath now a hand in the preserving, as well as he had in the making of things, no cause could depend upon him, and so now he would not be the First Cause, and therefore not God. And if to this we consider, how there is as great power requisite for the preserving, as for the making of the world, we shall easily find, that as none but God could make it, so there is none but God can preserve it. Now that there is as great power requisite for the one as for the other, is plain. For preservation is commonly defined by some, and acknow¬ ledged by all, to be but a continued creation : and they only dif¬ fer in this, that creation implies the creature to be made now; preservation implies it to be made heretofore. So that creation includes novelty, which preservation excludes; and excludes 54 Of the Holy Trinity . Art. precedent existency, which preservation includes: but in all things else, and therefore in this also they agree, that they both proceed from the infiniteness of God’s power. Again, either an infinite power is required to preservation as well as creation, or else a finite power can do it: but it is impossible for any finite power to preserve all things; for itself being finite is a creature too, and therefore needs preservation itself, as much as the things it is supposed to preserve, and so will all finite powers whatsoever; and therefore we must at length come to an infinite power that preserves all things in the world: and is itself preserved by nothing but itself, and that is God. But could not God make an independent creature, that needed not the continual concourse of his power to uphold and support it in its being \ And may not the world be such a thing? I answer, it is a contradiction, and therefore no derogation from, but the perfection of God’s power, that he cannot do it. An independent creature is as much as to say an uncreated creature; for if it be created, it must necessa¬ rily depend upon him that created it: yea, to say any thing is an independent creature, is as much as to say, it is both the Creator and the creature; for independency is an essential property of God, and therefore he that is independent must needs be God: and hence it is, that we must conclude that all creatures, and so every thing besides God, in that they are creatures and not God, must necessarily and continually de¬ pend upon God their Creator. So that as if he had not made them, they could never have been, so if he doth not preserve them, they cannot subsist or continue in their being. So that it is far more impossible for a creature to n subsist without n Creatoris omnipotentia est causa subsistendi omni creaturae : quae vir- tus si ab iis, quae condidit, regendis aliquando cessaret, simul omnium rerum species et natura consideret. [Prosp. Aquit. ex] August, [sent. 277. vol. X. App. p. 241.] Qui si non esset, nulla profecto res esset, quae aliquod nomen substantiamque portaret. Arnob. contra gentes, 1. [2. p. 43.] Sic enim se Deus habet ad res, sicut sol ad lunam, quo rece- dente deficit lumen lunae. Et sic, si Deus subtraheret suam virtu- tem a nobis, in momento deficerent omnia. Thom. [Aquin. Comm.] in Coloss. i. [lect. iv. ad calc.] 'O 8 e Xpicrros \eycov, on 6 Trarrjp pov ecus apn ipya^erai Kayo) ipyci^opai, rrjv dir]V€Krj avrov npovoiav vpiv napadr]- Xoi, Kal ipyacriav Aeyei to 8 uik partly to yeyevrjpeva, Kal Ti]v dLapovrjv av- to7s )(api£((rOai, Kal rjuLo^eiv to v avp- navra Koapov. el yap prj tovto rjv. I. Of the Holy Trinity. 55 God, than for light to subsist without the sun. His fat made them, and his fat can unmake them again. Yea, he put his everlasting arms under them, and immediately raised them out of nothing, and holds them up in their being : if he should take his everlasting arms from under them, they would lose their beings again, and presently drop down to nothing. As take a stone from off the ground, so long as you hold it, it will keep up, but let go your hold, and of itself it will fall down to the ground again from which you took it: so here, God takes us out of nothing : so long as he preserves and holds us up, we subsist; but if he let go his hold, alas ! in the twink¬ ling of an eye, we are where we were at first, in nothing. All which things being seriously considered, cannot but extort the confession from any person in the world, that God is the maker and preserver of all things visible and invisible. And this hath been the Christian faith in all ages. The Fathers all agree in it, usually joining them both (viz. creation and providence) together; and therefore I shall not separate them in my citations of them. First Justin Martyr : “ ° But this is the work of Providence (speaking of heaven and earth) which made this universe of various parts, differing both in their nature and use.” The next is Athenagoras : “ P It be¬ hoves them that believe God to be the Creator of the universe, to attribute the custody and care of all things to his wisdom and justice, if they will but stick to their own principles : and seeing they hold this, there is nothing in earth or heaven that they should think to be destitute of this his care and provi¬ dence ; but that the care of the Creator is over all things 7TO)S civ crvvecrTr) rode to nav, fir] rrjs dvcoOev x €L P° s Kv(3epvcocrT]$ Kai 8 lol- KovcTrjs Kai ra opcopcva dnavTa Kai to tcov avdpdoncov yevos ; Chrysost. in Genes, hom. io. [vol. I. p. 63.] 0 To 8e 7 rpovoias ccttlv c'pyov, tt)s rode to nav ck diacpopcov kut ovcriav re Kai xpeia v pepcov noirjcrdcnjs. Jus¬ tin. Aristot. dogm. evers. [p. 577.] P 'Otl del tovs noirjTrjv tov Qedv tovSc tov navTos napa8e£apevovs, rr / tovtov aocfoia Kai 8iKaioavvrj tt)V tcov ycvopevcov anavToov dvaTiOcvcu cpv\a- Krjv re Kai npnvoiav’ ei$e tois Idlais appals napapeveiv edeXoiev’ Tavra 8c nepi tovtcov (ppovoiivTas, pr]8ev r)yei- crOai pfe tcov Kara tt)v ypv, pr]T€ tcov kot ovpavov dvcniTponevTov, p.r)8 ’ anpovorjTOv, aAX’ cni nav acpaves 6- p-olcos Kai cfoaivopevov, piKpov tc Kai pei£ov, dirjKovcrav ycvc octkclv tt)V napa tov noir]cravTOs impcXciav. deiTac yap navTa rd ycvopcva ttjs napa tov noir]- cravTos empeXcias, l8icos 8e ckcuttov ku6 ’ o necfovKe , Kai npos o ntcftvKcv. Athenag. de resur. mortuorum. [ 18 .] 56 Of the Holy Trinity. Art. whatsoever, visible and invisible, great and little: for all things that are want the care of their Creator, and every thing peculiarly according to its own nature, and the end it was created for.” And Tertullian : “ q But that which we worship is one God, who in the glory of his majesty, out of nothing brought all that bulk, with every instrument of the elements, bodies, spirits, by his word commanding it, by his wisdom disposing it, by his power perfecting it.” And again : “ r The rule of truth requires that we first believe in God the Father and Lord Almighty, that is, the most perfect Creator of all things; who hanged the heavens on high, and founded the earth below, diffused the seas, and replenished and adorned all these with their proper and condign instruments and fur¬ niture.” Next to him is Clemens Alexandrinus : “ s The doc¬ trine that is according to Christ both acknowledged the Cre¬ ator, and that providence reacheth even to particular things.” And Arnobius : “ 1 Is there any religion more true, profitable, powerful, and just, than to know God to be the chief, and to know to supplicate this chief God, who alone is the head of all good things, and the fountain, the founder and maker of perpetual things, by whom all celestial and terrestrial things are animated and irrigated by vital motion; and who if he was not, truly there could not be any thing that could bear any name or substance 2” And so Athanasius : “ u There is q Quod nos colimus, Deus unus est, qui totam molem istam cum omni instrumento elementorum, cor- porum, spirituum, verbo quo jussit, ratione qua disposuit, virtute qua potuit, de nihilo expressit in orna- mento majestatis suae. Tertull. Apol. adv. gent. [c. 17.] r Regula exigit veritatis, ut primo omnium credamus in Deum patrem et dominum omnipotentem, id est, rerum omnium perfectissimum con- ditorem, qui coelum alta sublimitate suspenderit, terram dejecta mole so- lidaverit, maria soluto liquore dif- fuderit, et haec omnia propriis et condignis instrumentis et ornata et plena digesserit. Tertull. [Nova- tian.] de Trinit. [init.] S 'H (IKoXovdos XpLCTTO) $l$(t(rKa- Xta, Ka'i tqv brfpiovpyov eK@(ia£ei, Ka'i rrj v npovoiav p^XP 1 KClT “ pepos a-yei. Clem. Alex. Strom, t. [p. 347 -] t An ulla est religio verior, of- ficiosior, potentior, justior, quam Deum principem nosse, scire Deo principi supplicare, qui bonorum omnium solus caput et fons est, per- petuarum pariter fundator et condi- tor rerum, a quo omnia terrestria cunctaque ccelestia animantur, mo- tuque irrigantur vitali; et qui si non esset, nulla profecto res esset, quae aliquod nomen substantiamque por- taret? Arnob. contra gent. 1 . [2. init.] n Ov$ev ccttlv twv ovratv Ka'i yevo- pevcov, o prj fv avrcp Ka'i 81 avrov Ka'i yeyove Ka'i (arrjKfv. Athanas. Orat. contra gentes, [42. vol. I. p. 41.] I. Of the Holy Trinity. 57 nothing made that was not made, and doth not subsist in and by him. 11 And again : “ x But as he is good, by his own Word, which is God too, he governeth and constituteth all things, that the creature being illustrated by the guidance, command, and disposition of his Word and Reason, might stand firm; forasmuch as it is admitted into the communion and fellow¬ ship with him, who truly is, and from him it received power to exist, that it might not suffer those things by the flowing of its essence, which otherwise it would have suffered; I mean, it would not be, unless that Word preserved it, which is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature; because by him and in him doth every thing consist, invisible and visible. 11 And presently after: “yFor in a moment, at the beck of the Word of God, are all things alike dispensed, and every thing hath what is peculiar to it, and the same order is perfected in all things; for at the beck and by the power of the Divine and paternal Word, the governor and moderator of all things, heaven is turned about, the stars move, the sun displays his light, the moon runs her course, and the air is enlightened by it.” And the same Father expounding the Christian faith, begins it thus: “ z We be¬ lieve in one unbegotten God, the Father Almighty, maker of all things visible and invisible, having his being of himself. 11 The next is Theodoret: “ a Behold the providence of God x ’AXX’ coy dyados rd> eavrov Xoyco /cat avT(p ovti Qeco ttjv crvpnacrav 8ut- Kvfiepva Kai Ka 6 i(TT 7 )cnv, iva rfj tov \6yov r\yepovla /cat npovoia /cat 8ia- Kocrpr](T€L (pooTi^opevrj t] ktictis, ( 3 e- fialcos 8iapeveiv dvvrjOrj, are 8rj rod ovtco y ovtos e/c narpos Xoyov pera- Xapfidvovaa /cat ( 3 ot]dovpevr) 81 avTov els to elvai' prj dpa nd6p onep dv enaOev, el prj 6 Xoyos avrrjv eTrjpei, Xeyco 8r] to prj elvai, os ecrriv e Ikcov TOV QeOV TOV dopaTOV, npOOTOTOKOS ndarrjs KTicrecos' on 81 avrov /cat ev avreo (rvveo’TTjKe ra ndvra, tcl re 6 par a KOI to. dopaTci. Ibid. [41.] y 'Yi to pias yap ponrjs vevparos tivos tov Qeov Xdyov opov to. navTa biaKocrpeiTai, /cat ra ot/ceta nap eKci- rrrov ylverat, /cat napd ndvrcov dpov pia rat-is dnoreXeiTai. Neupart ydp /cat tuis dvvdpecri tov enicrTaTovvTOs Ka'i rjyepovevovTos tcov navTcov 6elov /cat naTptKov Ao-yott, ovpavos pev nepi- arpecfieTai, Ta 8e bar pa KiveiTai, /cat 6 pev rjXios (fralvei, rj 8e creXrjvr) nepi- 7roAet, /cat 6 dr/p pev vn avTov (ficoTi- Cerai, &c. ^ Ibid. [43, 44.] z IlLCTTevopev els eva dyevrjrov Qeov , narepa navTOv rode ndv avvea-TrjKe, pdv- 6ave rr]v SirjveKrj rov narpns epyaa'iav. Chrysost. in Joh. hom. [38. vol. II. p. 708. 20.] c Geov yap Kal fiovXrjs tt)s avwOev, ovr av avros nore roils enl yr/s ovaiv 6 ovpavbs, ovr av i) yrj rov oLKelov Kara Kaipovs dvaepvoi Kapnov. Cyrill. in Hos. [vol. III. pp. 64, 65. (54 E.)] IIap avrov yap eanv rjpiiv to elvat, to evepyelv, to prj dnoXeaSai. (Ecum. in Act. 17. [vol. I. p. 138.] e De hac re surama et excellen- I. Of the Holy Trinity. 59 to myself, how easy, and withal how dangerous a thing it is, to mistake and err in so great and f unspeakable a mystery as this is. If I think of it, how hard is it to contemplate upon one numerically Divine nature in more than one and the same person; or upon three Divine persons in no more than one and the same Divine nature. If I speak of it, how difficult is it to find out fit words for the explication of it. If I say, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost be three, and every one distinctly God, it is true; but if I say, they be three, and every one a distinct God, it is false. I may say, the Divine persons are distinct in the Divine nature; but I cannot say, the Divine nature is divided in those Divine persons. I may say, God the Father is not the Son, God the Son is not the Father, and God the Holy Ghost is neither Father nor Son; yet I cannot say, the Father is not the same God with the Son, or the Son is not the same God with the Father, or the Holy Ghost is not the same God with the Father and the Son. I may say, in the sacred Trinity, or among the Divine persons, there is one before another, and one greater than another; yet I cannot say, in the sacred Deity, or in the Divine nature, there is one greater than another, or one s before another. I can say, God the Father is eternal, God the Son is eternal, God the Holy Ghost is eternal; yet I can- tissima modestia et timore agendum est, et attentissimis ac devotis auri- bus audiendum, “ ubi quseritur uni- tas Trinitatis, Patris, Filii et Spiri- tus Sancti, quia nec periculosius ali- cubi erratur, nec laboriosius quseri¬ tur, nec fructuosius invenitur.” Aiig. de Trinit. 1 .1. [vol. VIII. p. 7r;2.1 1 AAA appijrov kcu av€K(ppa(TTOv to rr/s ciy[as Tpiddos pva-Trjpiov. Kal fj-Tj elnr]s, ttws ; vrrep yap ncvs, eVrt tovto’ ppde eXirrjs, iroicp Tpoirep; vi rep yap rpoTTov 6 Sews rponos' ppde ei- nps, Troup Xoycp; virep yap Xoyov 6 Belos Xoyos. Athanas. Qusest. ad Antioch. 1. [vol. II. p. 269.] And therefore St. Basil advises, rrepl rra- rpds, Kal viov, Kal TrvevpaTos ayiov prj av^rjTelv, dXX’ okticttov kui opoov- (Tinv T pidda per a napprialas Xeyeiv Kal (fipovelv, Ka\ toIs enepcoTcdai Xe¬ yeiv, otl (SanTi^ecrdai del x o pev Trpeb- tos, 6 d' vcrTepos' dXX’ apa oi Tpels, 7raTr)p, vios, Kal Trvevpa ayiov. did tovto Kal avvavapxoi kui elcriv, Kal ovopd^ovTai. Athanas. Qusest. 13. tom. ii. p. [339.] Kcu ev TavTTj 777 T piadi, ovdev TrpwTov, r) vcrTepov’ ovdev pel£ov, r/ eXaTTOv’ dXX’ oXai at Tpels virocTTacreis awdiaieovl^overai eavrals elai, Kal lo’ai. Id. in symb. [vol. II. p 728.] 60 Of the Holy Trinity. Art. not say there are three eternals. I may say, the Father is one God, the Son is one God, the Holy Ghost is one God; yet I cannot say, the Father is one God, the Son is another God, and the Holy Ghost is a third God. Again, I may say, the Father begot the Son, the Son was begotten of the Father, and the Holy Ghost proceeded from the Father and the Son; and so he that was God begot him that was God, and a third person, who was God too, proceeded from two, each of which was God; yet I cannot say, one God begot another God, or from two Gods issued forth a third God. Or thus, I may say, the Father begat another, who was God; yet I cannot say, he begat another h God : and from the Father and the Son proceeded another, who is God; yet I cannot say, from the Father and the Son proceed another God. For all this while, though their nature be the same, yet their persons are distinct; and though their persons be distinct, yet their nature is the same. So hard a thing is it to word so great a mystery aright, or to fit so high a truth with expressions suitable to it, without going one way or other awry from it. Hence it is that I shall not use many words about it, lest some or other slip from me unbecoming of it. In brief there¬ fore, here it is said, that in the unity of the Godhead there be three Persons; that is, though there be but one living and true God, yet there are three Persons, who are that one living and true God. Though the true God be but one in substance, yet he is three in subsistence; and so three in subsistence, as still to be but one in substance. And these three Persons, every one of which is God, and yet all three but one God, are really related to one another: as they are termed in the scripture, one is a Father, the other a Son, the other an Holy Ghost. The first is Father to the second; the second is Son to the first; the third is neither Father nor Son, but the issue or Spirit of both. The first was a Father from eternity, as well as God; the second was God from eter¬ nity, as well as a Son; the third was both Holy Ghost and h Pater genuit alium, viz. filium, non autem alium Deum, sed aliam personam. August. ]. Of the Holy Trinity. Cl God from eternity, as well as either of them. The Father is the first person in the Deity; not begotten, nor proceeding, but begetting: the Son the second person; not begetting nor proceeding, but begotten : the Holy Ghost the third; not begotten, nor begetting, but proceeding. The first is called the Father, because he begot the second; the second is called the Son, because he is begotten of the Father; the third is called the Holy Ghost, because breathed both from the Father and the Son. And though these be really thus amongst themselves dis¬ tinct from one-another, yet are they not distinct in the Divine nature: they be not distinct in essence, though they be dis¬ tinct in the manner of their subsisting in it. The Father subsists as a Father; the Son as a Son; the Holy Ghost as a Spirit; and so have distinct subsistences, yet have all the same numerical substance K I say numerical or individual substance ; for otherwise they might have all the same Divine nature, and yet not be the same God. As Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were three distinct persons, that had all the same human nature, yet they could not all be called one man; because, though they had but one human nature, yet they had it specifically as distinguished into several individuals; not numerically so as to be the same individual man: and therefore, though they had but one specifical, they had several numerical natures; by which means Abraham was one man, Isaac another, Jacob a third. And upon the very same account is it, that among the angels, Gabriel, Michael, Ra¬ phael, though they have the same angelical nature, yet they are not the same angel. But here the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost have not only the same Divine nature in specie , but in numero; and so have not only one and the same nature, but are also one and the same God. The Father is the selfsame individual God with the Son; the Son is the selfsame individual God with the Father; and the Holy Ghost is the selfsame individual God with them both. I say, individual God; for the Divine nature is not k divided into * So ed. 1 7 16 . The MS. has sub- vnocrraafo-iv f/ rrjs pias ovaias 0eo- sistence. ttjs. Athan. in Qusest. ad Antioch. k ’A biaiperos yap ev ra?s Tpia'iv I. [vol. II. p. 268.] 62 Of the Holy Trinity . Art. several Gods, as the human is into several men; but only dis¬ tinguished into several persons; every one of which hath the same undivided Divine nature, and so is the same individual God. And thus it is, that in the unity of the Godhead there he three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, which great mystery, though we be not able to conceive of it, yet the scrip¬ tures give a sufficient testimonial to it. Now though this mystery hath received great light by the rising of the Sun of righteousness upon the world, yet it did not lie altogether undiscovered before; there being sufficient testimonies in the Law as well as in the Gospel of it. I shall make use of both, that by the mouth of two infallible wit¬ nesses, (the Law and Gospel,) this great truth may be esta¬ blished. First, of the Old Testament, which will furnish us with several testimonies of it, though not with so many as commonly are forced from it. God being so frequently styled Elohim , and saying in the first of Genesis, k Let us make man, may denote a plurality, but cannot convince any gainsayer of a trinity of persons in the sacred Deity. And the angels crying, Holy, holy, holy. Lord God of hosts, Isai. vi. 3, may be a stronger argument for the supereminent sanctity, than for the sacred Trinity in the Divine nature. But there are two or three places which seem to be very convincing; as, The Spirit of the Lord spoke hy me, and his word hy my tongue, 2 Sam. xxiii. 2. Where we have Jehovah, the Spirit of Jehovah, and the Word of Jehovah, which is his k Tertullian makes use of this place to prove the Trinity. Si te adhuc numerus scandalizet Trini- tatis, quasi non connexae in unitate simplici, interrogo quomodo unus et singularis pluraliter loquitur ? Faciamus hominem ad imaginem et similitudinem nostramj cum debu- erat dicere, Faciam hominem ad imaginem et similitudinem meam; utpote unicus et singularis ? Sed et in sequentibus, Ecce Adam factus est tanquam unus ex nobis. Fallit aut ludit; ut cum unus, et solus, et singularis esset, numerose loquere- tur: aut nunquid angelis loqueba- tur, ut Judaei interpretantur, quia nec ipsi Filium agnoscunt ? An quia ipse erat Pater, Filius, Spiritus, ideo pluralem se praestans, pluraliter sibi loquebatur ? Imo quia jam adhaere- bat ei Filius, secunda persona, ser- mo ipsius; et tertia, Spiritus in ser- mone, ideo pluraliter pronunciavit, faciamus, et, nostram, et, nobis. Tertull. adv. Prax. cap. 12. And Justin to the same purpose; ’AXAa TOVTO TO TO) OVTL CITVO TOV TTClTpOS 7T/}0- (BXrjde v yevvrjpa, npo ndvToov too v noir/paTcov avvrjv too nciTpl, Kai tovtoo 6 7 -ciTrip TvpoaopiKo'i. Dialog, cum Tryph. [62.] I. Of the Holy Trinity. 63 Son, as I shall shew afterwards, plainly and distinctly set down together. So also, by the Word of Jehovah were the heavens made , and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth , Psalm xxxiii. 6. Where we have again Jehovah himself, his word, and his breath or Spirit distinctly expressed. And again, Behold my servant whom I uphold , mine elect in whom my soul delighteth: I have put my Spirit upon him , and he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles , Isai. xlii. 1. Where Jehovah the Lord is speaking of Christ his servant, there are two per¬ sons ; and saith, he will put his Spirit upon him, there is the third. Thus we might discover this truth even in the Old Testa¬ ment, but in the New we can scarce look over it. Where we may read how, when Jesus was baptized, the heavens were opened unto him , and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove , and lighting upon him. And lo a voice from heaven , say¬ ing, This is my beloved Son , in whom I am well pleased , Matt, iii. 16. Had we, who know nothing but by our senses, been present at this time with Jesus at Jordan, our very senses would have conveyed this truth to our understandings, whe¬ ther we would or no. Here we should have heard a voice from heaven; whose was it but God the Father’s? Here we should have seen Jesus coming out of Jordan; who was that but God the Son ? And here we should have seen something else too, in the form of a dove; and who was that but God the Spirit? Thus was God the Father heard speaking; God the Son seen ascending; and God the Holy Ghost descending upon him. The first was heard in the sound of a 1 voice; the second was seen in the form of a man; the third was beheld in the shape of a dove. 0 mystery of mysteries ! that so high a mystery should be brought within the reach of sense ! 1 Et ecce columba descendit su¬ per Dominum baptizatum; et appa- ruit ibi sancta ilia et vera Trinitas, uae nobis unus Deus est. Adscen- it enim Dominus ab aqua, sicut in Evangelio legimus, et ecce aperti sunt cceli, et vidi Spiritum descen- dentem sicut columbam, et mansit super eum : et statim vox consecuta est, Tu es Filius meus dilectus, in quo mihi bene complacui. Appa- ruit manifestissime Trinitas, Pater in voce, Filius in homine, Spiritus Sanctus in columba. Aug. in Joh. tract. 6. [5. Vol. III. pars ii.] Pater auditur in voce; Filius manifestatur in homine; Spiritus Sanctus digno- scitur in columba. Id. And another elegantly, in bis poetical strain : Voce pater, natus corpore, flamen ave. 64 Of the Holy Trinity. Art. Thus we read how Christ, when upon earth, said, when he went to his Father, he would pray him , and then he would send the Spirit , John xiv. 16, 17. 26; xv. 26; xvi. 7. 13, 14, 15 : where we may observe the Son praying the Father, the Father hearing the Son, and both of them sending the Holy Ghost. Thus saith the angel to Mary; The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that Holy thing that shall he horn of thee shall he called the Son of God, Luke i. 35: where God the Father sends an angel unto Mary; God the Son is promised to be born of her; and therefore God the Holy Ghost to over¬ shadow her. Thus it is said, God (the Father) hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, Gal. iv. 6. And there¬ fore the apostle wishing all happiness to the Corinthians, con¬ cludes his Epistle with a holy prayer to all the Persons in the sacred Trinity for them, saying, The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost he with you all, 2 Cor. xiii. 14. There is still behind, besides some other that it might be proved from, one eminent place to confirm this truth: Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, Matt, xxviii. 19. As the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost appeared together, when John baptized Christ; so must all Christians, that thenceforth shall be bap¬ tized, be baptized in the name of all three. Where we have observable the Trinity in the Deity, the Deity of the Trinity, and the order of the persons in that Divine Trinity. 1st. The Trinity in the Deity; for here are plainly three; Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. 2ndly. The Deity of the Trinity, that every person is God; for here Divine worship is to be per¬ formed to them all; and all that profess the true religion must be baptized in the name of every one, as well as of any one of them: and 3rdly, here is the order betwixt the sacred persons in the Deity; first, the Father; secondly, the Son; thirdly, the Holy Ghost. It is clear therefore, that there are no more and no fewer persons in the sacred Deity than three; but how doth it appear that these three persons are all but one God ? Plainly; For there are three that hear record in heaven, the Father, the 1 . 65 Of the Holy Trinity. Word , and the Holy Ghost , and these three are one , 1 John v. 7, that is, one God. Though this place of scripture be not extant in many ancient manuscripts, nor indeed in many ancient translations; yet in the days of m Arius, the grand oppugner of this truth, about three hundred and thirty years after Christ, it was never so much as questioned, and many of the ancient n fathers quote it. Which plainly shews that it was then received as canonical scripture, and therefore not to be questioned by us now. And if we proceed to reason, here also, though the unity of the Godhead be a truth which from natural principles may easily be demonstrated, yet the Trinity in the unity is a mys¬ tery which by the light of nature could never be discovered: forasmuch as our senses cannot perceive it, our tongues can¬ not express it, our experience cannot teach it, neither can our reason comprehend it. It is true, Trismegist, Plato, and others seem by the light of reason to have seen into this hidden mystery: but if we weigh their words and sentences, we shall find they speak of three Divine essences, rather than of three distinct persons in the same essence. And the glimmering light they had is thought to be borrowed from such as had seen or heard of m That it was not questioned in the days of Arius is plain, in that if it had, certainly Arius himself would have excepted against it when it was produced against him. For when Athanasius and he disputed con¬ cerning this truth in the Nicene council, Athanasius brings this amongst other places of scripture to prove it: irpos 8e tovtols nacnv, (saith he to Arius) 'loodvvrjs (fxxo-Kei , kol ot rpe7s to ev dcriv. [44. vol. II. p. 229.] And Arius makes no ex¬ ception at all against the authority of the place, as we may see towards the end of the said dispute, in the [second] volume of Athanasius’s works; which without doubt he would have done, if it had been then questioned. n Dicit Dominus ego et Pater unum sumus, et iterum de Patre et Filio et Spiritu Sancto scriptum est, et tres unum sunt. Cypr. de simpl. prael. [p. 109. de unit, eccl.] And besides the place before quoted, Athanasius mentions it again in his first book, De unita Deitate Trini- tatis ad Theophilum, in these words; Et unitum nomen naturale clause est declaratum dicente Johanne evangelista in epistola sua, Tres sunt qui testimonium dicunt in coelo. Pater et Verbum et Spiritus. [vol. II. pp. 606, 7.] And Fulgen- tius. In Patre ergo et Filio et Spi¬ ritu S. unitatem substantiae acci- pimus personas confundere non audemus. Beatus enim Johannes apostolus testatur dicens, Tres sunt qui testimonium perhibent in coelo. Pater, Verbum, et Spiritus, et tres unum sunt. Fulgent, in object. Arian. discus, object. 10. [p. 176.] V. et Hieron. in prolog. epist. canon, [vol. X. p. 1057.] BEVERIDGE. F 66 Of the Holy Trinity. Art. the scriptures, rather than to have sprung from their own reasons. It is true also, that reason may offer at some dark resemblances of this great mystery; ° as, the sun begets beams, and from the sun and beams together proceed light and heat; yet one is not before another, but only in order and relation to one another. P So in waters, there is the fountain or well¬ head ; then there is the spring that boils out of that fountain ; then there is the stream that proceeds from both the fountain and the spring; and all these are but one and the same water. So God the Father is the fountain of Deity; the Son, as the spring, boils up out of that fountain; and the Holy Ghost, that flows from both. But such and the like instances may serve to illustrate this mystery to such as do believe it, but are no demonstrations of it to such as do deny it. That which looks the most like a reason is drawn from God's understanding and knowing of himself, and so in him¬ self begetting the lively image of himself, (as a man that looks in a glass begets the image of his own face,) and this is the second Person in the Trinity, called therefore the express image of his Father*s person: and from this God's looking upon him¬ self, and representing himself to himself, cannot but proceed delight and rejoicing in himself; whereby the Father and the , Son delight in one another (as a man looking in a glass, if he smiles, his image in the glass smiles too, and seems to do whatsoever himself doth) ; and this mutual love to and joy in ° Something like to this is the simile of Athanasius: "Q.cnrep fjXios evi eis, o oe t]\los ex €l a Bets touovs XcopXs aKnvos. kcu IBov npocrcoTra pev rpla, Blctkos, ciktXs, kcu (poos, ov Xeyo- fiev Oe rpeLS tjaiovs, ciAA eva rjAiov, ov8e Xeyo pev rrpocreoTrov ev, aXXa TTpocroona rpla’ eav yap epoorqdfjs, on TrocroL rjXioi ev ra ovpavoo, peXXeis enreiv, on rjXios eis eernv ei o epco- rrjOfjs, on npocroona rov tjXlov Trocra eerr X, peXXeis elnelv on rpla, Blctkos, uktXs, Kal (poos' ovtcos voei KaX nepX rov Qeov. 0 eos pev els, Trpocrcorra Be tov evbs Qeov rpla. Athan. Qusest. al. tom. ii. p. [336.] p This is that which Ruffinus seems also to resemble this mystery by: De apertioribus requiramus. Fons quomodo ex se generat flu- vium, quo autem spiritu rapidum fertur fluentum ? Quod quidem cum unum et inseparabile sit et fluvius et fons, tamen nec fons fluvius nec fluvius fons intelligi aut appellari potest: et tamen qui viderit fluvium, videt et fontem ? Exerce te prius in horum explanatione, et discute, si potes, quae habentur in manibus, et tunc ad horum sublimiora veniamus. Ruffin, in expos. Symboli. [p. 18.] I. Of the Holy Trinity. G7 one another, is a third manner of being or subsistence in the Godhead, called the Holy Ghost. But these and the like are subtle speculations rather than solid arguments, and have more of a roving fancy than of convincing reason in them. Neither did I ever read or hear of any reason brought from natural principles for this mystery, but what by gainsayers might easily be evaded ; not because it is contrary (to), but be¬ cause it is above reason. But howsoever that the Son is God, we shall prove in the next; that the Spirit is God, we shall prove in the fifth article; and that the Father is God, is acknowledged by all; and yet that there is but one God, we have proved before : from whence it will clearly follow, that there are three Persons, every one of which is God, and yet there is but one God. And this was the ancient doctrine of the church of Christ, qJustin Martyr saith expressly! u Truly there is one God over the whole universe, who is made known or acknowledged in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. For seeing the Father of his own substance begot the Son, and issued forth the Spirit, there is all the reason in the world that they that have one and the same essence should be acknowledged to have one and the same Divinity. 1 ' And again: r “ It is fit therefore that we should acknowledge and confess one God, made known unto us in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost: as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, acknowledging the several subsistences of one Deity ; but as God, understanding the communion of those subsistences in the same essence. For Unity is understood in the Trinity, and Trinity is acknowledged in that Unity. 11 And elsewhere : s “ There is one God in the <1 Eis ovv rais dXtjBelais ecrriv 6 rav dirdvrav 0 eos, ev narpl, Kcii via, Ka\ ay la TvvevpaTi yvapi£opevos. enel yap £k rrjs olnelas ovalas 6 Trarr^p rbv vlov diveyevvqcrev, £k 8e rrjs avrrjs to nvev- pa nporjyayev, elKoras av to. rrjs avrrjs Ka\ puas ovalas pere^ovra, rrjs avrrjs Ka\ pias Beorrjros rjtjlavrai. Justin. Expos, fidei de rect. confess. [2. p. 42 ° ; ] r ''Eva tolvvv Qeov npoarjKev opoXo- yelv ev narpl, Kal via, Kal ay la nvev- y / V ' S ' fjUlTl yP(Opi^OfX€VOV f] p€V TTClTTjp, KCll vlbs, Kal nvevpa dyLOV rrjs pias Beo- rrjros ras vnoardaeis yvapl^ovras' rj 8 e Oeos to tear ovalav kolvov rav vnoerracreav voovvras. povcis yap Kal ev rpiabi voelrai, ko.1 rpicis ev povadi yvapl£erai. Ibid. [7.] s Eis eanv 6 Qeos rfj crownap^ei rav rptav Belav vnocrracreav, rav dia- (frepovo-av aXXrjXav, ov rfj ovcrla, aXXa rods rrjs vnap^eas rponois. rj duicfiopa 8 e rav rr/s virap^eas rponav ov diatpel to ev rfj ovala. Id. Q,u?est. et resp. ad Orthod. Quaest. 139, [p.502.] f 2 68 Of the Holy Trinity. Art. coexistency of three Divine persons or subsistences ; which are differenced from one another, not in their essence, but in manner of subsistence. But the difference of the manners of existence doth not divide or difference what is in the essence. r) And so Gregory Nyssen : t44 In his essence he is but one ; and therefore God commanded that they should look but upon one Name: but by the known properties or subsistences, it is distinguished into the faith of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.' 1 And so Liberius in his Epistle to Athanasius : u 44 For neither the Son nor the Spirit is divided from the essence of the Father, which filleth heaven and earth. There is therefore, as I said before, a Trinity in one substance, undivided, but one in essence, one in Deity, one in power, one in dominion, one in glory, one in likeness, and one in Spirit, for the Spirit is not divided." And Athanasius sends him word back again : x 44 And there¬ fore is our faith in one God, the Father Almighty, and in his Son the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost. For these are of one unity, one power, one substance, one essence, one glory, one dominion, one kingdom, in the image of the Trinity, consubstantial; by whom all things were made." And there are amongst others three questions, which Atha¬ nasius answers, that make much to clear this mystery, as well as to shew the judgment of the Fathers upon it. y First, 44 What is common to the holy Trinity V To that he answers ; 2 44 The essence is common ; the eternity is common; the * T<5 pev yap vopco rrjs ovalas ev eari' bio Kal els ev ovopa fiXeneiv 6 heo-TTorrjs evopoOerrjae’ rois be yvco- picrTLKois tcov {nroaraaecov Ibiwpaaiv, els narpos re Kal vlov Kal 7 Tvevparos ayiov 7 tIcttlv diypr)Tai. Nyssen. con¬ tra Eunom. 1 . 2. [vol. II. p. 431.] u Ov yap pepl^erai 6 vios £k rrjs irarpiK^s vtto err acre cos, ovbe to irvevpa to ayiov rrjs TvXrjpovaps tov ovpavov Kal Ti)V yrjv. eanv ovv, KaOcos 7 rpoel- Tvov, Tj Tpicis ev pea {iTrocrTacrei prj pe- pi^opevT], quid est Pater quo Deus est, quo substantia est, quo aeternitas est, hoc Filius, hoc Spiritus Sanctus. Ita etiam quicquid est Filius in eo quod Deus est, quo substantia est, quo ae¬ ternitas est, hoc Pater, hoc Spiritus Sanctus. Et quicquid est Spiritus Sanctus in eo quod Deus est, quo substantia est, quo aeternitas est, hoc Pater est et Filius. Una ergo in tribus Divinitas, una essentia, una omnipotentia, et quicquid substan- tialiter potest dici de Deo. Aug. de tempore, Serin. 38. [Alcuin. de Trin. lib. 1 . c. iii. p. 709.] I. Of the Holy Trinity. 71 so whatsoever the Son is, as he is God, as he is substance, as he is eternity, that is the Father, that is the Holy Ghost: and whatsoever the Holy Ghost is, in that he is God, in that he is substance, in that he is eternity, that is the Father, that is the Son: and therefore in all three there is but one Divinity, one essence, one omnipotence, and what else can be spoken substantially of God.'” Neither hath this truth been affirmed by particular Fathers only, but decreed also in several councils, as by the first general council at h Constantinople, the second council at Carthage, the fourth council at k Arles, the sixth at 1 Toledo, the m Lateran council, an. Dom. 649; yea, and by an ancient council here in n England held under archbishop Theodorus, about the year of our Lord 670. But the fourth council at Toledo speaks the substance of them all: °“According to the holy scriptures,” say they, “ and the doctrine which we have received from the holy Fathers, we confess the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost to be of one Divinity and substance, believing a Trinity in the diversity of persons, and preaching unity in the Divine nature, we neither confound the Persons nor separate the substances.” And thus we conclude that in the unity of the Godhead there be three Persons of one substance , power, and eternity , Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. h Ilept TOV VOp.OV TU>V hvTLK&V" KCU tovs iv ’ Avnoxela aTrebe^dpeda, tovs plav ofioXoyouvras irarpos, kcu vlov nai ay'iov TTveypuiTos deor-qra. Concil. Constant, i. cap. 5. [vol. I. p. 812.] 1 Concil. Carthag. sec. c. 1. k Concil. Arelat. 4. c. 1. 1 Concil. Tolet. 6. c. 1. m Concil. Lateran. c. 1. n V. Bed. Histor. Angl. 1 . 4. c. 17. [p. 160.] 0 Secundum enim divinas scrip- turas et doctrinam quam a sanctis patribus accepimus Patremet Filium et Spiritum Sanctum unius Deitatis atque substantiae confitemur, in per- sonarum diversitate Trinitatem cre- derxtes, in Divinitate unitatem prae- dicantes nec personas confundimus nec substantias separamus. Concil. Tolet. 4. c. [1. vol. III. pp. 578,9.] ARTICLE II. OF THE WORD, OR SON OF GOD, WHICH WAS MADE VERY MAN. The Son , ivhich is the Word of the Father , begotten from everlasting of the Father , the very and eternal God , of one substance with the Father , took man's nature in the womb of the blessed Virgin of her substance : so that two whole and perfect natures , that is to say , the Godhead and the Manhood , were joined together in one person , never to be dividedwhereof is one Christ , GW tfW twam. I N the former article we have proved that there is but one God, and that this one God is three Persons, and every one of those three Persons is one God, and yet all but one God. In this we have the second Person, there spoken of, to be considered, called the Son ; because begotten of the Father, not by spiritual regeneration, as other sons of God are, but by eternal generation, as none but himself is. The Son, who is the a Word of God, which expression is taken from those words, In the beginning was the Word , and the Word was with God , and the Word was God , John i. 1 ; which place being clearly to be understood of Christ, he is therefore called the Word; in Greek, Logos , a word, or speech; because, as a . man utters his mind by the words of his mouth, so doth God reveal his will, and effect his pleasure, by his b Son. By the a Rat prj pot ye\oiov rts voplcrp to evepyeia. Athenag. leg. pro Christ. vlbv eivai ts 7 roirjTai [iO.] pv 6 onoLov(nv ovdev (BeXriovs roov av- b Pater meus usque modo ope- Opconow deiKvvvrcs tovs deovs, 77 7 rep\ ratur, operatus est pater lucem, sed rod 0eot) Ka'i Tlarpos rj nepl tov vlov dixit ut fieret lux, si dixit verbo necfipovrjKapei', a\X ecrriv b vtos tov operatus est, Verbum ejus ego 0eo v Ao-yos tov naTpos iv Idea ko i (Christus) eram, ego sum, per me Of the Word , or Son of God . fyc. 73 word of God were all tilings at the first made ; he said, Let there he light , God said , Let there he a firmament , &c., twe? there was so. Hence the Apostle saith, vjord of God the heavens were of old , a we/ the earth stand¬ ing out of the water and in the water , 2 Pet. iii. 5 ; and, ^ worlds were framed hy the word of God , Heb. xi. 3 ; and the Psalmist, By the word of God icere the heavens made ; and all the hosts of them hy the hreath of his mouth , Psalm xxxiii. 6. All which God is elsewhere said to do by his Son. All things were made hy him; and without him was nothing made that was made , John i. 3 : the world was made hy him , ver. 10, and hy him (speaking of Christ) were all things created , that are in heaven , and that are in earth , &c.; all things were created hy him and for him. Col. i. 16. And c therefore it is that the Son of God is called the Word of God ; as also, because it was by him that he spake unto the Fathers, and gave them the promises ; and because, as our words are the birth and effigies of our mind, so did Christ come from the Father, and is the express image and lively portraiture of him. And though John be the only person that gives him this title in the New Testament, yet he was not the first that gave it him; but is rather thought to have taken it out of the d Chaldee para- factus est mimdus, in illis operibus; per me regitur mimdus in istis ope¬ ribus, Aug. in Joh. tract. 17. [15. vol. III. par. ii. p. 429.] Neither is this the doctrine of the New Testa¬ ment only, but of the Old also, where in the Chaldee Paraphrase (which the Jews had commonly read in their synagogues,) instead of 'row '2 d* 'n*m rr 1 ?? dini J made the earth, and created man upon it, is put n’inv nEom *2* 'ma rfo', I hy my word made the earth, and created man upon it. Isa. xlv. 12. And so xlviii. 13. Jer. xxvii. 5 : from which, and the like places, I suppose it is that Philo Judaeus calls \6yov rov Qeov, the Word of God, opyavov Qeov di ov (6 Koorpos ) KareaKevaarai, Phil, de flammeo gladio. [vol. I. p. 162.] And elsewhere he saith, 2klo. de Qeov 6 \6yos avrov earlv to KaOdnep op- yavco rrpovxp^crdpevos eKo orpono Lei. Id. Allegor. 1 . [III. vol. I. p. 106.] c This seems to be the reason that Athenagoras gives why Christ is called the Word of God, when he saith, aAA’ evnv 6 vlos rov Qeov \6yos rov narpos ev Idea ko! evepye'ia, 7rpos avrov yap koi di avrov rrdvra eyevero. Athenag. leg. pro Christ, [loc. cit.] d Where in the Hebrew text there is mru and D'n’pK i n the Chaldee Paraphrase, "t fcOEOft, the Word of God, is often put for it, and (which is observable) most usually where it is taken peculiarly for God the Son, as yud ron '2, For hy thee will I run through a troop ; hy my God will I leap over a wall. 2 Sam. xxii. 30. For which the Targ. hath ' 3 D« "pn'on 'IN ]'222 bD m 2 * 'nb* VD'Oai pvw j'D'pn, For by thy word I will mul¬ tiply tents, and by the word of God I 74 Of the Word , or Son of God , Art. phrase of the Old Testament, which in our Saviour's time was much in use, where it frequently occurreth. This Son , who is the Word of the Father , is said to be begotten of the Father. Here he is said to be the Word of the Father , and not the Word of God; because he cannot so properly be said to be begotten of God, as of the Father. For here, as in the Trinity, we must have a great care how we speak concerning the Father's begetting of the Son, and the Son's being begotten of the Father; we may say, the Father begot the Son, and so he that was God begot him that was God ; but we must not say God begot God. We may say one Divine person begot another; but we must not say one Divine nature begot another, for that would imply two Divine natures, one of which is begotten, the other not. But how may we properly say then, the Son is begotten ot the Father? By receiving from the Father an unbegotten essence. His person must be begotten of the Father, otherwise he would not be his Son ; but his essence must be unbegotten, otherwise he would not be God. And that Christ was begotten, and so begotten of the Father as to receive an unbegotten essence from him, is clear ; but how the person of the Father, and not his essence, did beget; and how the person of the Son, and not his essence, was begotten, and so how the Son was begotten of the Father, is a mystery which will subdue all strong towers. So wherewe read mxn. nx tzpnbx xnm in 1 ?21, And God created man in his own image , Gen. i. 27. the Hierus. Targum hath it, rp ”1 xid'd xnm rrmmi mx, And the Word of God created man in his likeness: and again in the Heb. we read it, 12 own mm bip nx, And they heard the voice of the Lord, Gen. iii. 8, but in the Targ. of Onkelos it is rendered, "i xio'o bp rv lyn'ttn, And they heard the voice of the word of the Lord; and to name no more, we read in the Heb. mm bx-nm tmnb’is n3>Ttt>n, Israel shall be saved of the Lord with everlasting salva¬ tion. Isa. xlv. 17: which being clearly spoken of the Son of God, the Saviour of the world, the Chal¬ dee Paraphrase renders it expressly, x , n‘?2 |p“nc "i xin’m pnsrrv bxTCP Israel shall be saved, or redeemed, by the word of the Lord with an ever¬ lasting salvation, or redemption. And hence I conceive it is that Philo the Jew calls his bevrepov Qeov, op6ov Qeov Xoyov s OLTLOV TOV UaTpos , to shew that the Father is the cause of him, (os to, 6 UaTrjp pov pei£cov pov ic ttIv , avrov yap eyei to re eivai Kal navTa ocra e^et. Orthod. Fid. 1 . 4. c. 19. [init.] And St. Basil clearly, ’E7reid?) yap ano tov narpos r) ap\r] r&) via, Kara tovto pei£s elvai tov vlov, yevvrjTOV e< tov ayevvrjTov (pcoTos cnro\apy\rdvTa, Ka\ avTo£a>r)V , Kal avToayaOov Trjs £ooo7TOLOV 7P]yr}s, Ttjs naTpiKrjs dyadoTTjTos 7 rpo- ikOovTa. Basil, advers. Eunomium, 1. 2. [vol. I. p. 740.] ; clearly inti¬ mating, that though he had his Divine life and nature from the Fa¬ ther, as the fountain of Deity, yet he received it not by participation, but by communication; he did not only participate of it, but it was wholly communicated unto him. And there¬ fore it is also, that though Athana¬ sius saith in one place, Christ is e’/< 0eou Geos', o-o(j)ov cro(f)6s, Kal €K XoyiKov Aoyos, Kal €K UaTpos vlos, contra Arrian. Orat. 5. init. [vol. I. p. 618.] yet in another place he saith, A VToaocpia, avroXoyos, avro- dvvapis, Ibia tov UaTpos i&Tiv, avTO- (Jiebs, avToaXrjOeia, avTobiKaioo-vvq, avToapeTr], contra Gentes, Orat. fin. [vol. I. p. 46.] : that is, as I sup¬ pose, iv eavTco e^cov ttjv aoepuiv, tt]V £cor]v, tt]v dvvapiv, &c. which sup¬ position is both consonant to this place of scripture, where he is said, iv iavTOj) e^eu/ rrjv £cor/v, and also to the Father himself, who in this seems to be his own interpreter; for be¬ fore he tells us how Christ is thus avToaocpta, avTobvvapes , &c. he first tells how he is not, saying, Kat ort ayadov i£ ayadov yivvrjpa, Kal aXrj- Oivos vide vTTap-^cov bvvapis eVrt tov narpo?, Kal aocf)La, Kal Aoyos, ov Ka- ra p€TO\r]V rafra &>v, ovde e^codev €7nyivopiva)V tovtoov aurco Kara tovs avTOv peri^ovTas, Kal ao(^i,£opivovs 8 l avTOv, Kal bvvaTOvs, Kat XoyLKOvs iv avTco yivopivovs, SAX’ avToaocpla, &c. where he shews, that they that participate of strength and wisdom from God, are dvvarol, Kal XoyiKol iv avTid, viz. ©e< 5 ' but Christ is not so, he is not iv avTq> ia Kal bvvapls. And this is the purport of the like expressions in other of the Fathers, as Theodo- ret calls him, AvTobvvaptv, Kal avro- Ccorjv, Kal avToo-ocjiiav, contra Ana- them. quart. Cyrilli. [vol. IV. p. 712.] Eusebius, A vtovovv, Kal avro- Xoyov, Kal avTocrofplav, Kal ei rt be avTOKaXov, Kal avroayaObv, Evang. demonst. 1. 4. c. 12. Origen, A vto- Xoyov, Kal avToao(f)Lav, Kal avToaXr]- Oeiav, Kal avTobiKaiocrvvrjv . Contra Cels. 1 . 3. [41. vol. I. p. 474.] And so Chrysostome terms him, A vToa- Oavaaiav , avTopaKapioTrjTa. And Da- n. which was made very Man. 83 communication of the Divine essence from the Father to him: for if he hath the same nature that the Father hath, he cannot but be the same God that the Father is. And the same would further appear, if we considered how the names, properties, works, and worship, which is given to the Father, is given to the Son too. The Father is called Je¬ hovah , and so is the Son, Isa. iv. 3. Hos. i. 7. The Father is called God, so is the Son, John i. 1: In the beginning was the Word , and the Word teas with God , and the Word teas God. With God as to his person, God himself as to his es¬ sence; so John xx. 28. Acts x. 28. 1 Tim. iii. 16, &c. The Father is Alpha and Omega, the First and the Last, Isa. xli. 4. xliv. 6, so is the Son, Rev. i. 8, 17. Is the Father eter¬ nal ? so is the Son, Isa. ix. 6. Apoc. i. 8. Is the Father almighty? so is the Son, Heb. i. 3. Is the Father every- mascen calls the whole Trinity, and so every Person, Avrocpcos, avraya- BoTrjra, avTofarjv, avToovcriav, de orth. fid. 1. i. c. 8. [p. 24.] where he also explains himself what he means by avros in that composition, adding after avToovcriav, tw? pr] 7ra P iripov to eivai e^overav. All which, and the like expressions amongst the Fathers, Epiphanius seems to me most clearly to explain, saying, 'O Geos Xoyos iv iavreo e^cov ttjv natrav reXeiorrjTa avToriXeios cov, av- toBcos cov, avrodvvapis, avrovovs, av - ro prjftev e^iov r/perepov; enei 8e cos Qeos avvrj- nrai too narpi rrjv avrrjv e^oov e^ov¬ er lav' cos 8e dvdpoonos rjplv, e£ rjpbbv ycip e\a(3e rrjv tov dovXov popljorjv eiKOTcos pecrLTr]s wvopaarai, crvvdnToov ev eavrbb ret Stecrrcora, rfj evorrjTi tc bv (pixreoov Oeor-qros Xeyco Ka'i avQpcoTro- Tr/Tos- Theodor. Dial. 2. c. 5. [vol. IV. p. 56.] Ovtco yap ean pea-lrrjs Qeov na'i dvdpbo7r(ov Qeos (bv Ka'i av- dpa>7ros yeyovtbs, ov rpane'ts rrjv v eerrt peatTrjs Koiveoveiv. eav be tov pev evos exrjTcu , tov be evos aTvecr)( olvl(T pdv o s fj oxxeTL peo’iTtjs eaTLV. el tolvvv prj e^eTai tt)s tov tv arpbs (pvaecos ovk eaTi peariTijs d\Wi 7 ve 6cl(c>, ' “ You understand, oh hearers, if you attend, that the word holds forth, that this offspring was begotten of the Father before all creatures whatsoever; and that he that was begotten is another in number from him that did beget him, every one will confess."” And Athanasius begins the exposition of the Christian faith thus z : “We believe in one unbegotten God, the Father Al¬ mighty, maker of all things, visible and invisible, who hath of himself what he is ; and in one only-begotten Word, the Wis¬ dom and the Son, without beginning, and from everlasting, begotten of the Father."” And so St. Hilary : a “ The Son is from him who is the Father. The only-begotten from the unbegotten : the offspring from the parent: the living from the living. As the Father hath life in himself, so is it given to the Son to have life in himself. Perfect of perfect; all of all, without division or scission; because one is in the other, and the fulness of the Godhead in the Son. Incomprehensible of incomprehensible ; for none know their minds but one an¬ other. Invisible of invisible ; because he is the image of the invisible God: and he that seeth the Son seeth the Father also. One of the other; because they are Father and Son : not as * Maprvprjarei 8e poi 6 Xo-yop rrjs crocplas avros cov ovtos 6 Qeos dno tov narpos toiv oXcov yei>vrj6els, Kai Xoyo?, Kai aocfila, Kai 8vvap.is, Kai dotja rov yevvrjcravTos vvrdpxoov. Jus¬ tin. Dial, cum Tryphone, [6i.] y Noeire, ti> aKpoarai, el ye Kai tov vovv irpocrexeTe, Kai otl yeyevvrjcrdai in to tov naTpos tovto to yevvtjpa 7rpo navTcov carXeds tcov KTierpciTcov 6 Xdyos 1 edrjXov, Kai to yevvcopevov tov yevvcov- tos apiOpw eTepov ecrTt, nets dcTicrovv opo\oyr]creie. Ibid. [129.] z Iha-Tevopev els eva ayevvr/TOv Qedv, narepa navTOKparopa, 7rdvTu>v 7TOlTjTT]V OpaTCOVTe Kai aopaTCOV, TOV e'xovTa a(j) eavTov to elvaC Kai els eva povoyevrj Xoyo v, (rocfilav, viov, eK tov Trarpos avap^cos Kai aidloos ye- yewrjpevov. Athan. in expos, fid. [vol. I. p. 99.] a Est Films ab eo qui Pater est, unigenitus ab ingenito, progenies a Parente, vivus a vivo. Ut Pater habet vitam in semetipso, ita et Fi- lio data est vita in semetipso. Perfec- tus a perfecto, quia totus a toto ; non divisio aut scissio, quia alter in altero, et plenitudo divinitatis in Filio est. Incomprehensibilis ab incompreliensibili; novit enim ne¬ mo nisi invicem. Invisibilis ab in- visibili, quia imago Dei invisibilis est, et quia qui videt Filium videt et Patrem. Alius ab alio, quia Pater et Filius. Non natura Divinitatis alia et alia, quia ambo unum. Deus a Deo, ab uno ingenito Deo, unus unigenitus Deus. Non dii duo, sed unus ab uno; non ingeniti duo, quia natus est ab innato. Hilar, de Trin. lib. II. [n.] II. 93 which was made very Man. if the nature of the Divinity was one and another, for they are both the same. God of God; of one unbegotten God; one only begotten God. Not two Gods, but one of one : not two unbegottens; for one is begotten of the other unbegotten.” And again: b “ Therefore this unbegotten God did of himself before all time beget his Son: not of any subject matter, for all things are by the Son ; nor of nothing, because of himself he begot his Son.' 1 ’’ And St. Augustine : c “ The Word of God was always with the Father, and always the Word; and because the Word, therefore the Son. He was always there 5 - fore the Son, and always equal; for he is not equal by growth, but by birth. Who was always born of the Father, the Son God of God, coeternal of eternal. The Father is not God of the Son, but the Son is God of the Father; therefore did the Father by begetting of the Son, give him to be God ; by begetting of him, gave him to be coeternal with himself; by begetting of him, gave him to be equal with himself.” And as the Fathers speak of the Son's being begotten from eternity of the Father, so do they much contend for his being very and eternal God , of one substance with the Father. As Ignatius : d “ If any one saith there is but one God, and confess- eth Christ Jesus, but thinks the Lord to be a bare man, and not the only-begotten God, the wisdom and word of God, but thinks that he consisteth only of soul and body; such a one is a serpent, preaching deceit and error to the destruction of men.” And Justin Martyr, having disputed long with Try- pho the Jew, at the length says, e “ And that Christ, who is b Hie ergo ingenitus ante omne tempus ex se Filium genuit, non ex aliqua subjacente materia, quia per Filium omnia; non ex nihilo quia ex se Filium. Ibid. 1 . III. [3.] c Verbum Dei semper cum Patre, et semper verbum; et quia ver¬ bum, ideo Filius. Semper ergo Filius et semper equalis. Non enim crescendo sed nascendo equalis est. Qui semper natus est de Patre Filius, de Deo Deus, de seterno coeternus. Pater autem non de Filio Deus, sed Filius de Patre Deus. Ideo Pater Filio gignendo dedit ut Deus esset; gignendo dedit ut sibi coeternus esset; gignendo dedit ut equalis esset. Aug. [vol. III. par. ii.] in Joh. Tract. 48. [6.J (1 ’Eav rls Xeyy pev eva Qeov opo- Xoyy] de Kal Xpicrrov ’ Irjaovv , yj/iXov de clvdpconov eivai vopi^r] rov Kvpiov ovxl Qeov povoyevrj, Kal crocfilav, Kal Xoyov Qeov dXA’ ck \fsi)^(fjs Kal acopa- ros avrov povov eivai vopl^rj, 6 roiov- tos o(f)is early anaTrjv Kal TvXdvrjv KrjpvTTcov err drvaiXeiq dvOpuaroav. Ig¬ nat. Epist. ad Philadelph. [p. 101.] e Kal on Kvpios cov 6 Xptcrrus Kal Qeos, Qeov vios vnap^iov, Kal dvvapei (fiaivopevos nporepov cos ayrjp, Kal dyyeXos, Kal ev nvpos do^rj cos ev rf] ficircp necpavTai, Kal enl rrjs Kplcrecos rrjs yeyevr\pevr\s enl 2 odopa anode- deiKrai ev noXXois rois elprjpevois. Justin. Dial, cum Tryphone, [128.] 94 Of the Word , or Son of God , Art. the Lord and God, being the Son of God, and having ap¬ peared before in power as a man and an angel, both appeared in the glory of fire, as in the bush, and in the judgment that fell upon Sodom, is abundantly proved by what hath been said" And so Tertullian f : “Neither are - we ashamed of Christ, seeing it delights us to be judged and condemned for his sake. Him we have learned to be born of God, and being born, to have been begotten, and therefore to be the Son of God, and called God from the unity of his substance," viz. being of one essence or substance with the Father. And this is that which Athanasius so confidently affirms through all his works: I shall produce only one place. We believe Christ to be “ S Omnipotent of omnipotent; for whatsoever the Father rules and governs, that doth the Son rule and govern too. Perfect of perfect; in all things like unto the Father." But for this we have a whole synod of Fathers, the first gene¬ ral council that ever was, express and clear, having delivered their mind concerning this particular in these words : h “ We believe in one God Almighty, maker of all things visible and in¬ visible ; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father, the only begotten; that is, of the substance of the Father. God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, of the same substance with the Fa¬ ther," or of one substance with the Father, as the convocation that composed these Articles expressed it. Neither was this council the first that used the phrase of one substance with the Father , for we see Tertullian using of it long before; and Athanasius saith ,that it was not invented by the council, but taken out of the Fathers that lived before them. f Neque de Christo erubescimus cum sub nomine ejus deputari et damnari juvat.-Hunc ex Deo prolatum didicimus, et prolatione generatum, et idcirco Filium Dei et Deum dictum ex unitate substantiae. Tertul. Apol. adv. gentes [cap. xxi.] o UavTOKparopa e’/c navTOKpciTopos’ navToov yap oov apx eL ° Uarrjp /cat Kparei, apx £l Kat o vios, /cat /cparet' o\os e£ oXov, bpoios tg3 narpl a>v. Athan. in expos, fid. [vol. I. p. 99.] h IhaTevopev els eva Qeov 7 rarepa navTOKparnpa, navToov oparcov re ko\ aoparcov Troiryrrjv, /cat els tov eva Kvpiov 'irjaovv XpicrTov rov viov tov Qeov, yevvrjSevra e/c tov narpos, po- voyevp, TovrecrTtv e< tt)s ovalas tov 7raTpbs, Qeov e< Qeov, (fia >? e/c (pcoTos, Qeov akrjOivov e/c Qeov a\r]0ivov, yev- vr/devTa ov TVOipBevTa, opoovaiov tco iraTpi. Concil. Nicaen. in syinb. [Athan. Ep. ad Jov. 3. vol. I. p. 1 Ot §e enicrKoiroi ovx eavrols ev- povres Tas \e£eis dAV e’/c Trarepwv e'xovres Tt]V papTVplav ovtcos eypa\fsav. ’E7rt(T/co7rot yap dp^otot 7 rpo erwv IT. which was made very Man . 95 We have seen how express the Fathers are in avouching Christ to be God, and truly they are as express too in averring him to be man. As Ignatius^ : “ Mary did there¬ fore truly conceive a body, having God inhabiting in it; and God the Word was truly born of the Virgin, clothed with a body of the like passions with us. He was truly conceived in the womb, who formeth all men in the womb, and made him¬ self a body of the blood of the Virgin only, without the help of man. He was’carried in the womb the set time that we are, and was truly born as we are." And so Athanasius 1 : u But on the other side, when once the Word was born of Mary in the fulness of time, to take away sin, (for so it pleased the Father to send his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,) then it is written, that taking flesh he became man, and in that suffered for us, as Peter said ; for Christ (saith he) suf¬ fering for us in the flesh, that it might be evident, and all might believe, that being God from eternity, and sanctifying whom he came unto, and disposing all things according to the will of the Father, at the last he became man for us. And the Godhead, as the Apostle saith, dwelt in the flesh bodily , which is all one as if we should say, being God he took to himself a body, and using that as an instrument became man for us." And again: m “For the body which our Saviour had of eyyvs ttov eKarov TpiaKovra rrjs peyd- ).r)s 'Piopr/s, Kill tt/s i^perepay 'KoXeio y, ypacf)dvTes rjridiravTO tovs nolppa Xe- yovras tov vlov Kal prj opoovmov rta narpl. Athanas. in epist. ad Afri- canos episcopos, [6. vol. I. p. 896.] k ’AA rjdoos TOivvv eyevvqcre M apla ircopa 0 eoi/ evotKov ex ov Kat dXrjBcbs eyevvrjBe 6 Geos Aoyoy ck tt/s napBe- vov, crcopa 6p.0107ra.6es rjpdv rjp(j)Lecrpe- vos. dXrjBoos yeyovev ev p^rpa 6 ndv- ray dvOpbnrovs ev p^rpa biauXaTTOiv, Kal eTToirjaev eavro) ircopa eK tov tt/s napBevov alparos, rrXijv bcrov dvev opiXlas dvbpos' eKvo(f)6pr]6e V Trepidbois, Kal aXrjBcos erex6r] wy Kal rjp et?. Ignat. Epist. ad Trallianos, [p. 76.] 1 "Ore 8e eK Mapiay eTrebr/prjcrev dvBpomos dnat; enl crvvreXela tcov alcovcov els aderijcnv rrjs dpaprlas" ovtio yap evdoKrjcras 6 Ilarpp errep\f/e tov eavTOv vlov yevopevov ck yvvai- kos, yevopevov vtto vopov, Tore e’lprjTai otl o’dpKa irpoaXafioiv yeyevrjTai dv- dpa)7ros, Kal ev TavTp TrenovOev virep rjpbiv, a)? elnev 6 ITerpoy, XpUrTOv ovv TradovTos inrep rjpd>v crapKi , iva beixOfi, Kal rravTes TTLCTeviriopev otl del Geos d)v Kal ayid£cov npos ovs eyevero, biaKoapwv re Kara to fiovXrjpa tov ttci- rpoy ra irdvTa, vcrrepov Kal 8l rjpds yeyovev dvBpanros’ Kal crcopaTiKcbs, cos cfrrjiriv 6 ’ AnoaToXos, KaTipKTjirev rj 0 eoTps ev Tp aapKi, iaov rv rj Mapia. Id. Epist. ad Epictetum, [7. p. 906.] 96 Of the Word , or /Son of God , Art. Mary, according to the Divine scripture, was by nature a human and a true body. It was a true one, because it was the same with ours, for Mary was our sister.'” And as for the last thing, that Christ is both God and man in one Person , the same Father is clear: nU Christ is but one Person, compounded of Cod and the human nature, as every common man is of the animal and rational part."" And St. Augustine : ° “ Neither because he said (by the obe¬ dience) of one man did he separate Cod, because he became man; because, as I have said, and it is to be observed, he is one Person. For he is but one Christ, the Son of Cod from eternity by nature, and the Son of man which in time was assumed. 11 Again, P“ Let us acknowledge a twofold substance in Christ, to wit, the Divine in which he is equal to the Father, and the human in which the Father is greater than he. But both together, Christ is not two but one ; lest Cod should be a quaternity, not a Trinity. For as the rational soul and body are one man, so is Cod and man one Christ. 11 I shall conclude this with that excellent passage of St. Chrys- ostome ; q “ When thou hearest of Christ, do not think him Cod only, or man only, but both together. For I know Christ n Xpiarbs ev npocrcoTrov eari avv- reOev e’x Qeov Kai dvdpaaroTrjTOs, to? 7T as avOpttOTOS 6 KOIVOS €K £6)OV Kai XoyiKov. Id. de Trin. Dial. 5. [24. vol. II. p. 536.] 0 Nec quia dixit hominis separavit Deum, quia hominem assumpsit: quia sicut dixi, et valde commen- dandum est, una persona est. Ipse namque unus Christus et Dei Filius semper natura, et hominis Filius qui in tempore assumptus est. Aug, [Vol. VIII. p. 629.] contra serm. Arrianorum, c. 8. p Agnoscamus geminam substan- tiam Christi, divinamviz. quasequa- lis est Patri, et humanam, qua ma¬ jor est Pater. Utrumque autem simul non duo, sed unus est Chri¬ stus. Ne sit quaternitas non trini- tas Deus. Sicut enirn unus est homo anima rationalis et caro, sic unus est Christus Deus et homo. Id. [vol. III. par. ii.] in Joh. Tract. 78 - [ 3 -] Q Xpiarov de otciv aKovajjs pr) tov Qeov Xoylarj povov, prjde rrjv evaap- kov olKovopiav povr/v, dWa to avvap- (porepov. - € 7 rel oida Xpicrrov nec- vacravra , Kcii oida Xpiarov ex nevre aprojv 7T€VTaKLoxiXiovs avdpas 6pe- yj/avra yoopis' yvvaiKwv xat naidioov’ oida Xpiarov dt\fsr/ v vdarcov 7repnra- TrjcravTa' oida Xpiarov dnoOavovTa, Kai oida Xpiarov veKpovs eyeipavTa, Kac tov acoparos avTov top vaov ava- crTrjcravTa‘ oida XpiaTov IIiAdra) 7ra- petrraira, Kai oida XpiaTov rw 7rarpt crvyKaOrjpevov' oida Xpiarov vtto dy- ye\cov npoaKvvovpevov, Kai oida Xpi - arov V7 ro ’lovdalcov \i6a£opcvov. Kai Ta pev eVdya) 77/ deorrjTi, rd de rfj dvOpwnoTrjTL’ dia yap tovto avvap- (f)OTepov eiprjrai. Chrysost. Aoy. els tov ripiov aravpov. [vol. VII. p. 503-1 II. which was made very Man. 97 was hungry, and I know that with five loaves he fed five thousand men, besides women and children. I know Christ was thirsty, and I know Christ turned water into wine. I know Christ was carried in a ship, and I know Christ walked upon the waters. I know Christ died, and I know Christ raised the dead. I know Christ was set before Pilate, and I know Christ sits with the Father. I know Christ was worship¬ ped by the angels, and I know Christ was stoned by the Jews. And truly, some of these I ascribe to the human, the other to the Divine nature ; for by reason of this is he said to be both together.'” But besides particular persons, there are many ancient councils that determined this truth; but passing by r others, I shall only cite the fourth general council gathered together at Chalcedon, both because it was a general council consisting of no less than 630 bishops, and also because it was called on purpose to confirm this truth; and when assembled they defined amongst other things that Christ s was begotten of the Father as to his Divinity before all ages, and that in the last days, for us and for our salvation, he was born according to his humanity of the Virgin Mary, the mother of God, and that he is made known as one and the same Jesus Christ, the Son, Lord, and only-begotten, in two natures, without con¬ fusion, conversion, division, or separation. The difference betwixt the two natures being no ways changed by their union, but rather the propriety of both natures preserved, and making up one Person and one subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons. And thus we have the first part of this article confirmed from scripture, reason, and Fathers: the next folioweth. r V. Concil. Hispal. 2. c. 13. [vol. III. p. 562.] Tolet. 6. c. 1. [Ibid. p. 601.] 8 n po alcopcop pep etc rov narpos yepprjdipra Kara rr)V OeorrjTa, in icr- Xcltoov de rci)v rjfiepcov top avrop di rjpas Kai did ttjp rjperepap acorrj- piap itc Mapias rijs Uapdepov teal 6eo- tokov Kara ttjp apdpconoTrjTa, ipa Kai top avrop ’\rjcrovp Xpiarop vlop, kv~ pLOP, popoyeprj, ip dvo (fiva-ecrip aervy- Xvtoos, arpinTas, abiaipiros, d^oopl- ittoos ypa>pi£6p,epop, ovdapov rrjs tmp ( pvaeoop diafPopas dppprjpipris did rr/p ipaxTip, x els dvo npoacona p.epi( t opepop r/ diaipovpepop. Concil. Chalced. apud Evagr. hist, eccles. 1 . 2. [vol. III. p. 291.] BEVERIDGE. H 98 Of the Word , or Son of God , Art. Who truly suffered , wets crucified , dead , and buried , to reconcile his Father to us , and to be a sacrifice , fto/ oft/?/ ybr original guilt , to a/so /or actual sins of men. That the Second Person in the sacred Trinity was begotten of the First from eternity, and conceived by the Third in time, and that in the womb of a virgin; and so became both per¬ fectly God and perfectly man, perfectly united together in the same Person, we have seen in the foregoing part of this article. And in this we are to dive into the reason of this so great a mystery, why did the Son of God thus become the Son of man? Why did he thus take the human nature into his Divine Person? When he came from heaven to earth, what did he before he went again from earth to heaven ? How did he deport himself towards his fellow-creatures, and how did they carry themselves towards him ? Did they not highly honour and extol him, who had so honoured and extolled them as to assume their humanity into his Divinity ? No : he was so far from being honoured amongst them, that he truly suffered , was crucified , dead and buried. But it is strange so great a Deity should be loaded with so much ignominy. Was it for his own sake he suffered all this? No: it was to reconcile God to our souls, and to be a propitiation for our sins. First, he suffered: though God be without passions, yet God-man is not without his sufferings. Whilst God and not man, he could not suffer if he would, neither would he suffer if he could. But when he was man as well as God, he both could suffer what he would, and would suffer what he could; and not only could and would, but did truly (and not in show only, as the Cerdonites, Manichaeans, and others, asserted) suffer many things in his life, and most of all at his death. For he was then crucified, which was a punishment usual amongst the Romans till abrogated by Constantine the Great, who, being the first Christian emperor, is thought to have forbidden it out of the respect and honour he had unto him whom we have here asserted to have undergone it, and so to II. which was made very Man . 99 have honoured it r . He was crucified; that is u , there being first a straight and erect piece of wood (which himself first carried towards the place of execution) made fast in the earth, and a transverse beam fastened towards the top of it, and after that another piece of wood fastened to and standing out from that which was fixed in the ground; his body being lifted up was applied to the straight piece of wood that stood in the earth, his hands were nailed to the transverse beam that went across or athwart over the other, his head reached above the transverse beam towards the top of that which was fixed in the ground; and towards the bottom of it were his feet nailed, his body resting upon that other piece of wood which was fastened into and stood out from that which was t Sed quia ipse honoraturus erat fideles suos in fine hujus seculi, prius honoravit crucem in hoc se- culo, ut terrarum principes creden- tes in eum prohiberent aliquem no- centium crucifigi. Aug. [vol. V. p. 473 -] de verbis Domini in Evang. sec. Mat. Serm. [LXXXVIII. 8.] Denique modo in poenis reorum non est apud Romanos, ubi enim Do¬ mini crux honorata est, putatum est quod et reus honoraretur si crucifi- geretur. Aug. [vol. III. par. ii. p. 546.] iti Joh. Tract. 36. [4.] Ad illam postremo crucem non perve- nies, quia jam de poena generis hu- mani sublata est. Cum enim sub antiquis scelerati crucifigerentur, modo nullus crucifigitur. Hono¬ rata est et finita est; finita est in posna* manet in gloria. Id. [voL IV. p. 267*] in Psa. 36. [ser. ii. 4.] IIpoTepop pev yap 6 (rravpos opopa Karadiicrjs rjv, vvv\ 8e tt pciypa Tiprjs yeyopep. Chrysost. els top aravpov. [vol. V. p. 567.] u The form or figure of the cross vve may most clearly discover out of Justin Martyr, who saitli, Mopokc- poiTOS yap nepara ovdepos (iXXov irpa- yparos r/ o-xrjparos e\ei dp tls elneip Ka\ airodeli-ai el prj tov tvttov, os top (TT avpbp beiKpvarLP' opOiop yap to ep earL £v\op, a

s Kepara ra > ept Kepart nape- £evypepa tci dy Kepas KaL avrd e£e%op earip, e(f) ov enoxovpTai 01 crTavpovpepoC Kal (BXeneTai d>s Ke¬ pas, Kal avTO &vp Tols dXXoiS Kepacri avpeo-xrjpaTicrpepop, Kal nenpypevop. Justin. Dial, cum Trypli. Judseo. [91.] To yap pvaai dno popefialas ttjp \^vxi/P pov, Kal eK x eL P° s kvpos ttjp povoyepri pov, c rcoaop pe eK T 6 )P ttjp TanelpcocrLP pov, opolcos prjPvopTos 8 l ov 7 radovs epeXXep ano- Ovrjo’Keip, TovTecrTL crTavpovadaC to yap, Keparoip popoKepcoToap, otl to axip a T °v (tTavpov eVri popov npo- ^nyW^PVP vpiv. Ibid. [105.] From whence we may perceive, how the cross was not only one piece of wood set in the ground, and another athwart upon the top of it, as it is usually pictured; but there was a third piece of wood fastened about the midst of that which stood upon the ground, ecf) ov enoxovpTai oi a-Tavpovpepoi : which is the same also that Irenaeus means, when he saith, Natatoria piscina quinque ha- bebat porticus, unde dominus para- lyticum sanum in suam domum ire praecepit. Ipse habitus crucis fines et summitates habet quinque, duos in longitudine, et duos in latitudine et unum in medio, ubi requiescit qui clavis affigitur. Iren. adv. hae- res. 1. ii. c. [24. 4. p. 151.] H 9 100 Of the Word , or Son of God, Art. fixed in the earth. Upon his head was a crown of thorns, above his head was a table fastened, on which, after the Roman custom, his accusation was written in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin characters, that all might read what it was he was there nailed and crucified for. Neither was Jesus only thus nailed and fastened to the cross, but there he hung till his soul was forced from his body, and so he died. After which, he was not suffered any longer to hang there, but was taken down, and laid in a sepulchre, and so buried. Neither did he mind his own things in all this; no, it was only upon their account that laid these things upon him, that he was pleased to undergo them. He suffered for us, only that we might not suffer from God; he was crucified here, that we might be glorified hereafter; he died that we might live, and was buried for a time, that we might not be damned to eternity; for he suffered , was crucified, dead and buried , and all to reconcile God to us. Man naturally is at odds with God; God hates man’s person, and man God’s precepts. To make up this enmity betwixt them, Christ joined both their natures in one Person, and so shedding the blood of the hu¬ man, with it he appeased the wrath of the Divine nature, and so reconciled his Father to us , not only by quenching the fire of his anger towards us, but also by purchasing his love and favour for us. And by this means also, laying down his life for us, he offered himself a sacrifice to God, a sacrifice , not only for original guilt , but also for actual sins of men; a sin-offering, to propitiate God and obtain his pardon, not only for the natural corruption of our sinful hearts, but also for the actual provocations of our sinful lives. All which appears from the light both of Scripture and reason too. And truly that Christ suffered , was crucified , dead and buried , is the whole sum and substance of both Law, Pro¬ phets, and Gospel; the first, foreshewing it in types; the second, x foretelling it in prophecies; the third, relating x Lactantius, 1. iv. de vera sap. he) sic futura fuisse, et prophetarum c. 18. [p. 322.] doth not only pro- vocibus et Sibyllinis carminibus de¬ duce the prophets, but the Sibylline nunciatum est. Apud Isaiam ita oracles also as foretelling that Christ scriptum invenitur, Non sum contu- should suffer. Haec autem (saith max, neque contradico ; dorsum II. which was made eery Man. 101 meum posui ad flagella , et maxillas tneas ad palmas, &c. Sibylla quo- que eadem futura monstravit; E Is av6p.ovs x e W as Ka 1 OLviffTui/ verrepou A axroven Se 0ea> pairlpa %oAV, k els Slif/av o£os eSwKav, Tijs acpiAo^evlr/s ravTrjv Sel^ovai Tpaire- Cav. Et alia Sibylla Judseam terram his versibus increpat, Aut7? yap erv a(ppuv rbv erbv ®ebv ovk evoi](Tas TlalCovr' ev 6vr]To7v \jsev8oiov8alcov kcu Ilt - Adrot> rod fjyepovos 6 Kpirrjs eKpidrj, ipacrnycoQ-q, ini Koprjs ippanlcrdrj, ivenrvcrdr], aKavOivov erreepavov kcu nopcfivpovv Ipanov icfioprjcre, KarcKpiOr), icTTavpcoOrj dXrjddos, ov doKrjcrei, ov (pavTacrlq, ovk anarr]' aniBavev aXrj- 3d>s, kcu ercKprj, Kill rjyipdrj ck rcov veKpcdv. Ibid. [p. 76.] i ’AA rjdcds ovv iyevvrjBr), dXrjdcos rjv^rjdr], dXrjdcos eeftaye kcu emev, dXrj- £d)s caravpdodr], kcu dniOave, kciI divi- o-rr). Id. ad Philad. [p. 174.] k Quod auteni et in crucem actum unigenitum Dei Filium, et morte darnnatum eum qui ex nativitate quae sibi ex aeterno Patre est, naturalis et aeternus sit, frequenter, imo semper praedicamus ; non ex naturae neces¬ sitate potius quam ex Sacramento humanae salutis passioni fuisse sub- ditus intelligendus est, et voluisse magis se passioni subjici quam co- actum. Hilar, in Ps. 53. Enar. [12.] 1 ’’EnaBev anaBcos. ’Q, rrjs ddia- vorjrov crocplas , a> rr/s naifavcrrjs 81- dacrKaXias, oiKo8opovcrr]s apa Kal Ka- Baipovcrt]S. Old icrriv I8elv rci rcov nai8a>v iv yfrappois dBvppara' cnaBcv anaBcos' nplv aKovco rov prjparos im- XavBavopai rr/s crrjpaorlas rov enaBev’ inayopevov yap to anaBcos, ovk id Bavarov Kal ra(f)r)v Kal dvdarrjcnv 8i~ XecrBai a to rr/s fjperipas c'x ei (ra>TT ]~ plas Kcc^aXaiov’ el yap enaBe, n coy dnaBcios ; el anaBcos, ncos enaBe; Athanas. npos tovs A eyovTas enaBev anaBcos Qeos Aoyoy. [vol. II. p. 568.] 110 Art. Of the Word , or Son of God , impassibly ! Oh foolish wisdom, Oh jocular learning, building np with one hand, and pulling down with the other, like childish sports in sand ! He suffered impassibly ! Before 1 can hear this word impassibly , I forget what he suffered sig¬ nifies : for that which is added, impassibly , takes away both his death, burial, and resurrection, upon which our salvation depends. For if he suffered, how impassibly? or if impas¬ sibly, how did he suffer ?” And again: m “ Wherefore we must either acknowledge that our Saviour suffered truly, or that others also suffered impassibly, like to whom the Lord is preached to ham been tempted And again: n “ We must therefore either believe that all things were true and real too; or, if we say that he suffered impassibly, we must of necessity say withal, that all things that are said of him are but figures, fancies, and imaginations. If he did not truly suffer, neither did he at all truly rise again. If he did not truly taste of death, neither did he pluck out the sting of death, we are still in our sins , death still reigneth over all ; we are still kept out from our inheritance.” And presently: 044 But away with such madness, oh vain man ! for the testator is dead, the will is settled, the inheritance is propounded to the faithful, and punishment prepared for such reproachers.” And that Christ did not suffer all this for himself, but for us, even to reconcile the Father to us , and to be a sacrifice for our sins: p 44 for he had his conversation,” saith Ignatius, 44 without sin, and was truly crucified in the flesh, under Pon¬ tius Pilate, and Herod the tetrarch, for us, by whom also we are redeemed by his divinely blessed passions. And St. Hie- m ^Qtrre rj teal tov (rcoTrjpa Tvenov- Qevai dXrjQcos opoXoyrjreov, rj /cat tovs aXXovs d.7ra0a)s ireirovOevaL, hv KaS' ofioioTrjTa TveTveLpapevos 6 decnroTrjs KrjpvcrcreTcu. Ibid. [p. 569.] n *H ovv tv aura dXrjdr) Tvicrrevreov, /cat to ivaOos dXrjdLvbv opoXoyrjreov, rj rov 7 raQovs cnvaOoas yeyevrjcrQai Xeyo- pevov crxrjpa avayKr) /cat doKijaiv /cat (fravTaaiav navra Xoyi^eaQai. Et ov iveTvovQev aXrjQws, ovde dvecrrij navra)? aXr)Qd>s' el prj ovtcos eyevaaro Qa.va.TOV , ovde ra KevTpa eaj 3 eae rov Qavarov, ert ecrpev ev rats apapTiais rjpCbv' ert ftao-iXevaei navrcov 6 QavaTos * en ttjs KXrjpovopias aXXorpioi KaQecrrrjKapev. Ibid. [p. 569.] 0 ’AAA’ cm aye rr/s TOiavrrjs 7 vapa- nXrjtjlas a> avQparne, /cat 6 diaOepevos yap reOvijne, /cat rj diaOSjicr} leeievparai, /cat rj icXrjpovopla roly nurrevovaiv npoKeirau, /cat rj npcopia rot? ctvko- g>avraLS rjTolpao-Tai. Ibid. [p. 569.] P noAirevcra/aej/oi/ ocrloas dvev apap- rias /cat eVt Uovriov ntAarou [/cat ‘Hpa/Soi/] tov rerpap^ov KaQrjXcopevov vt rep r)pd>v ev (rapid aXrjdws, a(f) ov koi rjpels ecrpev dno tov Qeopav’ tv eneibrj navres eldiv imevOvvoi rco Savarco, aWos &>v ~ / > \ r \ 1 t \ Toov navrcov, avros virep 7ravr(ov to tbiov acopa r 4-] x Ei ns Xeyei /cai 7 rap eavrov npocreveyKeiv avrov rrjv npocr(f)opav, Kal ovfi brj paXXov vnep povov r)pO> v (ov yap av eber]Brj npoa-(f>opas 6 prj elbios cipapriav ) avadepa eerreo, Cyril. Alex. Anath. io. [Explan. xii. capi- tum; vol. VI. p. 155.] ARTICLE III. OF THE GOING DOWN OF CHRIST INTO HELL. As Christ died for us , and was buried; so also it is to be believed that he went down into hell. T HOUGH this article be in itself as clear and certain as any of the rest, yet men having exercised their fancies so variously upon it, they have drawn, as it were, a veil over it, and so eclipsed the light of it. And hence it is that some do not rightly understand it, others scruple at it, yea, and others do in plain terms contradict and gainsay it. That the first of these may be taught the truth concerning it, the second re¬ solved about it, and the third convinced of their error in denying it, I shall first lay down some propositions to clear it, and then proceed to the confirmation of it. First, It will easily be granted that this article, as it is here delivered, was taken out of that which we commonly call the Apostles'* Creed, it following and foregoing the same things here that it doth there. In the former article going before this it is said, he suffered, was crucified, dead and buried. In this he descended into hell. In the next immediately coming after it, that he arose again from the dead, and ascended into heaven. And hence also that the meaning and purport of it must needs be the same in both places. Secondly, I must confess that we cannot prove that this article was inserted in that Creed of almost 400 years after Christ, the Aquileian being the first particular church which is known to have inserted it in theirs : according to which a Ruffinus, being baptized into that church, framed his expo¬ sition of the Creed, with this article in it, but affirming that in his time (which was about the fourth century after Christ) a Nos tamen ilium ordinem sequi- per lavacri gratiam suscepimus. mur quem in Aquileiensi ecclesia, Ruffin, in exposit. symboli. [p. 17.] BEVERIDGE. I A KT. 114 Of the going down of Christ into Hell. it was neither in the b Roman, nor in the Eastern creeds ; which words of his some bring to prove the novelty of this article, but I think they are as great an argument for its antiquity as can be produced: for in that he saith it was not in the Roman nor Eastern creeds, he seems to me plainly to imply it was in some other creeds besides them. Ihit suppose this article was never in any other before the Aquileian, this derogates nothing at all from the truth of it; for there are other articles of our faith that were never questioned, but always received as undoubted truths ; as that of our Saviour's death, the communion of saints, God's being the maker ot heaven and earth, all left out of the ancient creeds expounded by Ruffinus, Maximus, and Chrysologus, and many 0 others. Yea, and there is only one of them, viz. that of God's being the maker of heaven and earth , expressed in the Constantino- politan. Now none can say, because that these are not in¬ serted in these creeds they are no articles of our faith : espe¬ cially, it would be a groundless argument against this under hand, being though we cannot produce any certain proof of its being in the creed before the Aquileian church brought it in, yet it hath ever since been received as an undoubted truth for this 1200 years together. And 1 can see no reason why we, at the length, after so many centuries acknowledgment of it, should now bring it to the bar, and accuse it of forgery and usurpation. Thirdly, I must confess also that the words in the d Greek and e Latin creeds, which we translate he descended into hell , b Sciendum sane est quod in ec- clesia? ltomanse symbolo non habe- tur additum, descendit ad, inferna: sed neque in Orientis ecclesiis habe- tur hie sermo. Ibid. [p. 22.] c As in those extant in Venantius Fortunatus, L. 11. in expos, symb. [p. 1227.] In Etherius and Beatus, 785 years after Christ. And the two Creek ones also, that of Mar- cellus, and the other written in the time of the English Saxons, excrihed by the bishop of Armagh, in Diat. de eccles. ltom. symb. [p. 6.] d In the Greek the words are, xa- Te\ 6 nvTa ds qfiov (viz. ronop) in the Apostles’ Creed; xureA&W ds t 6 p ddrjp in Athanasius’s, and xarf/X# ep (v aftrj, as it is in Horae Beatce Ma¬ rine ; or, as others, Kari]\0(p ds aftov; and they all amount to the same thing; only in the ancient manu¬ scripts in Bennet College library, cited by the reverend archbishop of Armagh, it is KareXQopra ds r« xarcorarn; and in the Confession of Sirmium, ds r« Kara^d^pia xartX- Oopra, which more exactly answers the Latin. c In the Latin it is, Descendit ad inferos; sometimes, Descendit ad inferna; sometimes, in inferna. Where we must look upon the in- feri as the inhabitants of the inferna , III. Of the going down of Clin At into Hell. 115 may admit of another interpretation than what in such a translation of them we put upon them. The word hadm especially, which we translate hell, being often used to express the state of the dead in general, without any restriction or limitation of happiness or misery. In which souse in Knglish we have no one word to give the full meaning or purport of it. Neither can I tell how to give a better periphrasis of it than by translating of it the other world , that invisible place where the souls that leave their bodies live, whether it be a place of bliss or torments. And in this sense I confess it is sometime taken f in scripture, the Apocrypha, Fathers, yea, and in and inferna the habitations of the inferi. So that descend'd ad inferos and ad inferna amount to the same thing too; for he could not descend ad inferna, but he must descend ad, inferos j neither could he descend ad inferos, but he must descend ad inferna. f Out of scripture, omitting some other places where it cannot well bear any other sense than this, I shall only produce two : the one out of the Old, the other out of the New Testament. That of the Old is, pint mm via 'o vo urea to’an' mo, which the LXX. renders, ris ivnv dvOpwnns a £r)K€v rnvs (v avrnis ve- Kpovs, And death and hades (jave up their dead, Apoc. xx. 13. Syr. W ei* m r> j /. qVi o, And death and scheul, (where we may note, by the way, how the Septuagint in the Old Tes¬ tament render scheul by hades j and the Syriac, on the other hand, in the New, renders hades by scheul; so in¬ differently were these two words used for one another,) where afirjs again comprehends as many as 6di- varos; and so it cannot signify here hell; for certainly that will never give up those that are in it. And so in the next verse it is said, Kol d Odivarns Kilt o a8rjs e(i\r)0r)(T avveyyvs adnv kutyril. Alex, in Gen. I. 6. [vol. 1 . p. 191.] ’AAXu KaV'KWrjvfS, Kai fidipftapm, sal nmrjrai, sat fiXd- ao(f)oi, sal nan dvdpdnmv yivns, avp- (jioivovcnv (v TnvroLS hpiu, d kpo- \nyr]p(vnv to npdypdi dm. ( ’hrysost. in 2 Cor. horn. 9. [vol. III. p. 600. ] Tt 8 ( d a8rjs; ni pen avrdv (bdcrt %£)- pnv vnnyanv (TKOrdvov, ni 8( rr)u and rov (p(f)avnvs (is to acfiavfS sai Of the going down of Christ into Hell. Art. 116 heathenish authors too. And as for the Latin infen , it is often taken in the same sense, yea, and mostly used to ex¬ press hades by. Fourthly, Though therefore we cannot but acknowledge that the Greek word hades (and so the Latin inferi) may sometimes, both in scripture and other writings, signify no more than the receptacle of souls in general, as the grave is the receptacle of bodies; yet it cannot be denied but that it often, if not mostly, is used to express the receptacle of sinful souls in particular, or that which we in English call hell , the place of the damned. Especially when the Lloly Ghost makes use of it to reveal the will of the great God by in the holy scriptures to us: and certainly it is the scriptural use of it which in the exposition of the Creed we are principally to attend unto. I shall here instance but in two or three places, wherein it cannot possibly be taken in any other sense; as, Luke xvi. 23. £ A nd in hades he lift up his eyes , being in tor- cleides perdcrTacnv rr/s \Jsvxps adrjv ccjmcrav, * v croopan icrrlv f) yjsvxi] (palverai did tcov ol- Ke'iwv ivepyeicov, peraaTciaa de tov crcoparos deidrjs yiverai, tovto yovv effiacrav elvai tov adrjv. Theophylact. in Luc. c. xvi. [p. 461.] Neque nostras animas derelinquet in in¬ ferno. Origen. in Matt. 27. tract. 35. [vol. III. p. 926.] Nonne in- ferna Christo testimonium perhibue- runt, quandojure suo perdito Laza- rum quern dissolvendum acceperant integrum per quatriduum reser- vaverunt, ut incolumem redderent cum vocem Domini sui jubentis au- dirent ? Aug. [vol. VIII. App. p. 18.] Orat. contra Judaeos, Paganos et Arrianos, c. 17. To these we may also add those ancient verses, made, as it is thought about the emperor Commodus’s time, called the Sibylline Oracles, where in the first book there is given this account of adr/s . . rovs S’ av virede^aro afiris A ifirjv 5 1 avre udAeirtrav iirei tt pwTOS p6- Aev ’Adap T evadpevos Qavdrou, yaia 8e pev apipe- tcaAvif/e Tovvena Sjj tt avres ol imxGdvioi yeyaoores ’A vepes els ’ A'l'Sao ddpovs Uvai naAeov- rai. [p. 7.] To these we may also add the anci¬ ent poets themselves, who often took the word adrjs to signify the other world in general, even in as large a sense as Odvaros, for which it seems often to be used, as Pindar. Isthm. Od. 6. [vol. I. p. 630.] T olaiiriv bpyoiis evx^rai 'Avridaas ai 8 av 777- pas T€ 8 e£acr 6 cu ivoAibv 6 KAsovikov 7rals.- Sophocles in his Ajax,— KpeUraccv yap a 5 a k evdccv 7) voawv pa- Tav, [635.J Homer. II. 1. [init.] rioAAas S’ Icpdipovs if/uxds di'81 irpuiaxf/ev. Theognis in his Elegies, v. 425. Tldvrwv pev pr] (pvvai eirix^oviOKTiv apl- iTTOV , IV^S’ im 8 e?v avyas videos peA'iov , Qvvra S’ 07ra>s icKiUTa irvAas aiSao irepri- > ’ 1 Kara) o eis aoov ray r evavria npoe\op.evas. Theod. de fine et ju- dicio, Serm. xi. [vol. IV. p. 654.] m Unde et in Graeca lingua origo nominis (viz. hades ) quo appellantur inferi, ex eo quod nihil suave habe- ant resonare perhibetur. August, de Gen. ad literam, 1 . 12. c. [66. vol. III. p.322.] viz. from a privat. and jjdvs, sweet, pleasant; or, as Eustathius, the ancient scholiast on Homer, ’AAA’ duo tov f}8ov A ■>/£ npos avrov, rj as ecopa ot ot/s poei uvtos \6yovs eniTy^dfLOTepas, 1. 2. contra Celsum. [43. vol. 1 . p. 419.] Cyril of Alexandria: Quod spiriti¬ bus in inferno prsedicatum abierit, et detentis in domo custodiae appa- ruerit Christus, et omnibus vinculis liberaverit, in Isai. 1. 3. c. 42. [vol. II. p. 539.] Irenaeus ; Ea propter Dominum in ea quae sunt sub terra descendisse, evangelizantem, et illis adventum suum remissam peccato- rum existentem his qui credunt in eum. Iren, advers. haeres. 1 . 4. c, [27. 2. p. 264.] And Clemens Alex- andrinus: Et y ovv 6 K vpios bi ovbev erepov els adov KarrjXOev rj 81 ci to evayye\icracr6ai. Stromat. 1. 6. [vi. p. 763.] And they had no other place of scripture to ground this their opinion upon, which clearly shews that they did interpret this place of his descent; v. et Job. de incarn. Verb. 1 . 9. c. 38. [p. 638. Photii Myriob.]; et CEcum. [vol. II. p. 514.] in loc. 122 Of the going down of Christ into Hell. Art. sure the ancient u Syriac, Arabic, and Ethiopic translations seem clearly to carry the sense that way. There is another place also that seems to have been an argument for this truth in the primitive church, that hath lost much of its virtue now; and that is this, Acts ii. 24, where it is said of Christ, Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death, because it was not possible that he should be holden of it: where, instead of the pains of death , some of the x ancient Fathers read the pains of hell, or hades, (Vulgar Latin, inferni;) and so doth the Syriac render it plainly, the y sorrows of scheul, or hell. And truly, was I deprived of the u The Syriac renders the latter end of the 18th verse, • v L\^cc> | - v r> “ And he died in the body, but lived in the spiritthat is, his body indeed was dead, but his soul or spirit was yet alive. And then in the next verse l^jo wOOl jAA21JL\ V\a aao, “ And he preached to the souls that were detained in hell;” that is, as the words manifestly im¬ port, though his body was dead, yet his soul or spirit being alive, in that he went and preached in hell. For here we can by no means under¬ stand his spirit of the Holy Ghost, by which he preached in the days of Noah; he not being said to have preached by the spirit by which he was quickened, but simply he went and preached. The Arabic more clearly; “ He was dead in the flesh, but lived in the spirit,” t>3s'U in which he » * m - betook himself, or went to the spirits in prison, and preached; plainly implying, that the spirit, in which he lived after his body was dead, in that he went to hell, and preached. And the Ethiopic trans¬ lation, though it doth render iv ro> 7 rv€v^aTL by in Spiritu Sancto , yet it doth not say that it was in this that he went down to hell; but only in general, that he that was put to death in the flesh and quickened in the Spirit went to the souls shut up in hell, and preached to them. He did not go in the Holy Spirit, but himself went in his own spirit. So that these ancient translations seem clearly to import that he did indeed go to hell. x The words in Syriac are j^*o “ and he loosed the sorrows, or pains of scheul;” because he could not be detained WgaaD oio “ in hell.” y Thus Polycarp read it: * Ov rjyeLpev 6 Qeos Xvcras tcis (bdivcis tov adov. Or, as it is in the Latin trans- lation, Quem resuscitavit Deus dis¬ solves dolores inferni. Polycarp, epist. ad Philip, [p. 14.] And Ire- nseus, Quem Deus resuscitavit so- lutis doloribus inferorum. Iren. adv. hares. 1 . 3. c. 12. [2.] So that two of the most ancient Christian writers that we have, plainly read it so. And if we descend down into after-ages we shall find St. Augustine [vol. II.] never quoting the place, but still read it so too; as: In quibus etiam hoc est quod apud inferos fuit, solutisque eorum doloribus quibus eum erat impossibile detineri. Epist. [164. 14.] Unde beatus Petrus eum dicit solvisse dolores inferni, in qui¬ bus impossibile erat detineri eum. Id. epist. [187. 6.] Quoinodo enim aliter accipiendum sit quod dictum III. Of the going down of Christ into Hell. 123 original Greek, and confined to a translation of the New Tes¬ tament, I should choose the Syriac above all the rest, it being (as may easily be demonstrated) the first translation that was ever made of it; and therefore, in all probability, made before the malice of heretics or the negligence of transcribers had brought any various readings into it. And for my part, the Syriac in this place rendering the Greek word by scheul , I can¬ not but persuade myself the word in Greek, when this transla¬ tion was made, was nothing else but hades , there being no other word it renders by scheul but only that. Especially many of the Fathers seeming to have read it so too; yea, St. Augus¬ tine produceth this place to prove that Christ descended into hell; as we may see in our quotations of him at the end of this article, and in the z margent. But there are some places which ever were and ever will be clear proofs of this truth. As, first, Eph. iv. 9, Now that he ascended , what is it but that he descended first into the lower parts of the earth. He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens , that he might fill all things: where the lower parts of the earth , to which Christ descended, I cannot see how they can be otherwise interpreted than of hell. For to say by the lower parts of the earth is meant no more than earth itself, to me it seems but a poor evasion. For where in scripture do we find the lower parts of earth put for earth itself? Or suppose it was so, yet here his ascend¬ ing and his descending have reference to one another. So est, Quern Deus suscitavit ex mor- tuis solutis doloribus inferorum. Id. de Genesi ad literam, 1 . 12. c. 33. [63. vol. III. par. i. p. 321.] And so, wheresoever else he quotes the place; and so others too, as Epiphanius in Anchor, et hseres. 69. Fulgent. 1 . 3. ad Thrasimund.: and hence it is, that in some Greek co¬ pies, particularly in that of Stepha- nus, printed an. 1550, ahov is put into the margent, as a different read¬ ing from Oaudrov, it being in some, as well as davdrov in other copies. z Et Christi quidem animam ve- nisse usque ad ea loca in quibus peccatores cruciantur, ut eos solve- ret a tormentis quos esse solvendos occulta nobis sua justitia judicabat, non immerito creditur. Quomodo enim aliter accipiendum sit quod dictum est, Quem deus suscitavit ex mortuis solutis doloribus inferorum, quia non poterat teneri ab iis, non video, nisi ut quorundam dolores apud inferos eum solvisse accipia- mus ea potestate qua dominus est, cui omne genu flectitur caelestium terrestrium et infernorum, per quam potestatem etiam illis doloribus quos solvit non potuit teneri. Aug. de Genesi ad literam, 1 . 12. c. 33. [63. vol. III. par. i. pp. 320, 321.J 124 Of the going down of Christ into Hell. Art. that the apostle seems clearly to intend the descent which immediately preceded his ascent into heaven, which could be no other than his descent into hell. It was many years after his descending to earth before his ascending to heaven; but his ascent into heaven was not much more than so many hours after his descent into the lower parts of earth, or hell a . Neither can we think that by the lower parts of earth here we must understand his grave, for that is seldom six foot deep in the earth, and therefore cannot well be called the lower parts of it. But again, here we see not only his ascending and his descending opposed to one another, but the lower parts of earth to the highest parts of heaven. So that we are to look out for the extremes that are the most distant from and contrary to one another in heaven and earth, the highest place in heaven and the lowest place in earth. The highest place in heaven, what is it but the right hand of God, whither Christ ascended l The lower parts of earth, what is it but hell, whither Christ descended ? Another place upon which we may build this truth is Rom. x. 6. But the righteousness which is of faith , speaketh on this ■wise , Sag not in thy heart , Who shall ascend, into heaven ? {that is , to bring Christ from above) or , Who shall descend into the deep? (that is , to bring Christ up again from the dead.) In which words we may observe, first, that Christ was among the dead; otherwise it could not be said, that is, to bring him from the dead. Secondly, as he was amongst the dead, so it was a deep place, otherwise it could not be said, Who shall descend into the deep ? Nay, thirdly, it was such a deep as the Greeks call an abyss , a bottomless pit, by which name hell is a And thus doth the Ethiopic translation seem clearly to carry the sense, rendering the words, ®mtv: hoHvh+: r*R C. : mytyhata mydr, Under the earth, we cannot probably understand any thing but hell, the only place gene¬ rally thought to be under earth. Nay, and this was the sense of the Fathers too upon the place. Infe- riora autem teme lnfernus accipi- tur, ad quern Dominus noster Sal- vatorque descendit. Hieron. in loc. [vol. VII. p. 613.] Nay and Ire- nceus brings this place, amongst others, to prove that Christ conti- III. Of the going down of Christ into Hell. 125 called, Apoc. ix. 1,2; xi. 7; xx. 1, 3. And I know not where the Greek word can well be otherwise interpreted; howsoever not here, and therefore doth the Syriac give us the explica¬ tion as well as the translation of the word, rendering it the deep , or h abyss of hell. And therefore also do many, both ancient and modern c writers, expound and interpret the words in this sense; and whosoever goes after them will not have many rubs in his way to stop his course. But, thirdly and lastly, the main foundation of this truth is still behind, and that is, Psalm xvi. 10. compared with Acts ii. 31. David saith, For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine holy One to see corruption. These words doth St. Peter in the Acts apply to our Saviour, chap, ii. 27 and 31, saying, that David seeing this bef&re , spake of the resurrection of Christ , that his soul was not left in hell , neither his fesli did see corruption: which to understand aright, we must consider how St. Peter is here handling the great point of the resurrection and ascension of the Lord Christ. And in treating of the resurrection, to satisfy all scruples that might arise upon his delivery of so great a mystery, he tells us from whence both the essential parts of his human nature arose, or were raised up : his soul, that was raised out of hell, and his body from the grave: for, saith he, His sold was not left in hell , neither did his fesli see corruption. His soul went indeed to hell, but it was not left there: his body was carried to the grave, but it did not see corruption there. And so there is no place can be a clearer proof of any, than this is of this truth, that the soul of Christ, when separated from his body, was in hell. For if it was not left there, but raised nued for a while amongst the dead, terra?. Sed et apostolus ait, Ascendit or in hell, before his resurrection : autem quid est nisi quia et descendit Nunc autem, saith he, tribus diebus in inferiora terra? ? Hoc et David in conversatus est ubi erant mortui, eum prophetans dixit, Eripuisti ani- quemadmodum prophetia ait de eo, mam meam ex inferno inferiori. Commemoratus estDominus sancto- Iren. adv. haeres. 1 .5. c. ult. [c. xxxi. rum mortuorum suorum eorum qui pp. 330, 331.] ante dormierunt in terram stipula- b \\ o, JlcooiAX AkO m V r>. tionis, et descendit ad eos extrahere And who ’ hath descended into the eos et salvare Sos, et ipse quidem abyss of hell? Rom. x. 7. Syr. dominus, Quemadmodum ait Jonas c y. Theophyl. [p. 108.] et Bucer, in ventre coeti tres dies et tres noctes 416.] in loc. mansit, sic eritfiliushominis in corde 126 Of the going down of Christ into Hell. Akt. thence at his resurrection, certainly it was there before his resurrection; it being impossible it should be raised thence if it was never there. It is certain therefore that the soul of Christ was in hell before his resurrection, and as certain it was not there before his death and crucifixion. For before that time his soul was in his body, and both on earth; and therefore it cannot be otherwise understood than that after he was crucified and dead, his body was carried to the grave, and his soul to hell: yet so, as that the one was not left in hell, neither did the other see corruption in the grave; for within three days after they were both raised up again, the one from hell, and the other from the grave, as St. Peter in this his sermon declares, and the immediately succeeding article asserts. But as there is no truth but hath been oppugned, so there is no place of scripture but hath been eluded; yea, this very place, which in itself is as clear as the meridian sun, hath been obscured by false glosses; some labouring much to persuade us, that the word here translated soul signifies no more than a body , or his person; and the word translated hell , no more than the grave. But let such consider, first, whether it be not a certain rule always to be followed in the interpretation of scripture, to expound every word in its most usual and com¬ mon signification, if the place will as well bear it, rather than force an unusual sense upon it l I confess the word d nephesh d The word which the Psalmist useth is ®D 3 , that which the apostle expresseth it by is \^vxb> and it can¬ not be denied but that they both in scripture may sometimes very pro¬ perly be translated a body, yea, a carcass, sometimes a person con¬ sisting both of body and soul: as for the first, that it sometimes sig¬ nifies a body, or carcass, we may see in those words, iDnn Mb untn a 3 “imn, You shall not make any cutting in your Jlesh for the dead, as we render it, Lev. xix. 28, where the Greek also renders ■odd by \|/-iryi), Kcii evTO/ildcis ov noirjcrcre ini ^vxfj iv rw (Tu>fxan vycov, i. e. as On- kelos hath it in his Paraphrase, or Targum, pann ab rrn bi' ! mm p 3 D 2 i, et laesionem super mortuum non facietis in carne vestra. So that iddd is rendered by run in Onkelos, and by n’m xddi in Jonathan’s Tar¬ gum. And so the Arabic, “ for the dead.” And indeed the sense will not bear any other signifi¬ cation : so Hi’ na rv©Ba ‘n byi, Gr. Kat inl Tvaaj] \fsvxj 7 rcTeXevrr]- Kvia OVK elaeXevcreTcu, Lev. xxi. II, that is, as our translation hath it; “ neither shall he go in to any dead body.” And so in the first verse of the same chapter, vor2 n 1 ? xomb. Graec. iv rais y/svxai? ov luavOrivov- rai iv rco eOvei avrwv : where 1TC: 1 III. Of the going down of Christ into Hell. 1^7 in Hebrew may sometimes signify no more than a body with¬ out a soul, sometimes both soul and body in one person; but where there is one place where it is taken in that sense, there are at the least twenty wherein it signifies no more than the soul. And because it sometimes signifies the body, must we always translate it so ? This is just as if because e herech in some few places signifies to curse , we should always translate it so. But again, grant the word may signify no more than the body, here it cannot be taken in that sense, for his body is after expressed by another word plainly signifying flesh. Ills soul was not left in hell , saith the apostle, neither did his flesh see corruption. Where it is plain, that the word used for his soul, and that for his body, denote two several things. Again, we cannot take this, but we must take the other word hades in its unusual sense too: for as nephesh doth but rarely signify the body, but most commonly the soul; so doth hades most commonly denote the receptacle of soids, but very rarely, if ever, the receptacle of our bodies. And what a ridiculous thing is it to force such far-fetched significations upon words, when the literal sense is not dissonant from, but consonant Onkelos renders by rvn, “the dead;” Jonathan by rvm •©: "in, “ the man that is dead the Syr. j A,V. » j t ) “ the soul that is dead,” and the Arabic also by >, “ the dead.” So it is taken also, Num. v. 2. yi. 6, 11. Hag. ii. 14: and it is some¬ times also put for the whole man, as rrnyn s'nn roson nmm, Gr. e£o\oOpev0r](TeT(U i) eseipr) ck tov yevovs avrrjs, Gen. xvii. 14: that is, as Onkelos renders it, sinrr, and Jonathan, sinn sun “ that man, or that person, shall be cut off from his people.” So also Gen. xii. 5. c xlvi. 26. and else¬ where. And this the word signifies, either by a synecdoche partis, the part being put for the whole, as An- selmus Laudunensis, Lyranus, and others think; or by a metonymy, whereby the thing contained is put for the thing that doth contain it; as St. Augustine, Animae nomine corpus solum posse significari modo quodam locutionis ostenditur, quo significatur illud quod continetur per illud quod continet. August. Epist. ad Optat. [190. 19. vol. II. p. 705.] . e That doth sometimes sig¬ nify to curse, as well as to bless, is plain; for it is said. And Job said, It may be my sons have sinned, imn, that is, as we render it, and cursed God in their hearts, Job i. 5. Syr. c^o- And the Arabic, AW i. e. “ And cursed, reproached, or spoke evil against God;” Gr. saica cvevorjaav npbs Qeov. Chald. ” mp, And provoked God to anyer. And it cannot but be taken so in this place, even for cursing rather than for blessing, this being a duty, not a sin; whereas it is a sin, not a duty, which the word is here used to express. And in this sense also is it used. Job i. 10. ii. 5, 9. 1 Reg. xxi. 10, 13. 128 Of the going down of Christ into Hell. Art. to all the other scriptures ? Certainly this is to turn the word of God all into allegories, synecdoches, and other tropes and figures. Lastly, it is not unworthy our observation, that it was the same St. Luke that wrote the Gospel who also wrote the Acts of the Apostles; and it is not very probable that he would use the word hades to signify the place of torments in his Gospel, Luke xvi, and I know not in what sense here in the Acts. And they that would put this sense upon the words must pretend to a far greater knowledge and skill in the interpretation of the scripture, than most or all the Fathers of the primitive church had, who generally trans¬ lated and expounded the words in a common and usual sense, That his soul was not left in hell , neither did his flesh see corrup¬ tion. And therefore we cannot but acknowledge, that though this doctrine be not verbally contained in the scripture, yet it may, by necessary consequences, be deduced from it; and so cannot but be received as one of those great truths which the most high God hath been pleased to make known to us in his holy scriptures. From scripture, if we proceed to reason, we may argue thus. The soul of Christ, after its separation from the body, and before his resurrection from the dead, was either in heaven or in hell; but it was not in heaven, therefore it must needs have been in hell. First, that it was in one of these two places I take for granted, being now reasoning against such as rightly deny all third places whatsoever appointed for the reception of souls when forced from their bodies, distinct from those two. And as for limbus pat rum, purgatory, and the like, we shall prove hereafter that they are human fancies, rather than divine truths. But the great question here to be agitated is, whether Christ’s soul, when breathed from his body, went to heaven or no \ For certainly, if it did not go to heaven, we need no more arguments to prove it went to hell, there being no other place it could go to. Therefore, second¬ ly, that the soul of Christ, when separated from his body, did not immediately go up to heaven, I think will easily be granted by such as do but seriously, and without prejudice, consider these things: First, that the Lord Christ, both while living, and when dying, was still accounted as a sinner; III. Of the going down of Christ into Hell. 129 though he had no sin inherent in him, or committed by him, yet he had sin imputed to him, and laid upon him; yea, so far, as that he is in plain terms said to be made sin for %s, as well as we are made the righteousness of God in him. And hence it is, that bearing the weight (though not doing the work) he received the wages of sin , death. And he thus dying as a sinner cannot in reason be thought to go whither saints, but whither sinners go when dead. His body, that was laid where the bodies of sinners are, in the grave; and so his soul, it is fitting that should go whither the souls of sinners go, to hell; and that he that died for sin should go to the same place whither such go as die in it. Not to be tormented there as sinners are, because he had not committed sins here as sinners had ; but only he having taken our nature upon him, and satisfied for our sins in his death and passion ; and it being three days before his soul and body, when once sepa¬ rated, were to be united together again, he suffered his body to be laid so long under the earth ; in the meanwhile his soul, that went down to hell, and there remained all that time, not to be tormented, for he had already suffered for us whatsoever the law of God could exact of us; but, first, that he might undergo the state and condition of a dead, as well as of a living f sinner; and so, secondly, that he might give us security for our pardon and redemption from hell. For, seeing he was even in the Devil's mouth, yet that roar¬ ing lion could not prey upon him; seeing he was in hell itself, yet could be kept there no longer than just as himself pleased; we may be assured he had conquered and overcome f Impleta est scriptura, quae dicit, Et cum iniquis reputatus est, quod et altius intelligi potest, dicente de semetipso Domino, reputatus sum cum descendentibus in lacum,factus sum sicut homo sine adjutorio inter mortuos liber, vere enim reputatus est inter peccatores et iniquos ut de- scenderet ad infernum. Hieron. in Isa. liii. 12. [vol. IV. p. 624.] And this is one of the reasons that Ful- gentius gives of his descent, even that he might go where sinners after death used to go, and so be in the BEVERIDGE condition of a dead, as well as living sinner. Restabat ad plenum nostrae redemptionis effectum, ut illuc us¬ que homo sine peccato a Deo sus- ceptus descenderet, quousque homo separatus a Deo peccati merito ceci- disset, i. e. ad infernum, ubi solebat peccatoris anima torqueri, et ad se- pulchrum ubi consueverat peccatoris caro corrumpi; sic tamen, ut nec Christi caro in sepulchro corrum- peretur, nec inferni doloribus anima torqueretur. Fulgent, ad Thrash mund. 1. 3. [c. xxx.] K 130 Art. Of the going do wn of Christ into Hell. the Devil for himself, and in himself for us, who are but as so many members of himself; and thus by his descending thither he hath s freed us for ever coming thither, or remaining there. But, thirdly, his soul, I suppose, did principally go to hell, and remained there whilst his body was in the grave, that so it might be in a state of humiliation, as well and as long as his body. His body was brought to the lowest place it could possibly be brought to, even to the grave; and so was his soul brought too to the lowest place it could possibly be brought unto, even to hell. And this leads me to the second reason why we are not to think that the soul of Christ went not to heaven but to hell; because, if his soul had ascended to heaven, as his body descended into the grave, then one part of his human nature had been exalted, whilst the other had been debased. For his soul, that would have been shining in the highest heavens, whilst his body was lying under a piece of earth; and so this would have been in a state of humiliation, whilst the other was in its state of exaltation. By which means, at that time he would have been wholly in neither state, but partly in both. And so most of the systems of divinity that ever were made, teaching only a double state of Christ, the one of his humiliation, the other of his exaltation, must be changed, and a third state added, partly of exaltation, partly of humi¬ liation. But that needs not, for certainly Christ was never £ Hoc autem ideo factum est, ut per morientem corporaliter carnem justi, donaretur vita seterna carni, et per descendentem ad infernum ani- mam justi, dolores solverentur in- ferni. Fulgent. [Ibid.] ad Thrasi- mund. 1. 3. nda'^ooy yap avros fjpas ave\a/3e, kol neivcov avros rjpas erpe- (f)e, Ka\ els rbv adrjv Karafialvoov fjpas avecfiepe. Athanas. [vol. I. p. 104.] els to Tvavra pol 7 rapabodr/, &c. Quia ideo ille pervenit usque ad infernum ne nos remaneremus in inferno. Aug. in Psa. lxxxv. [17. vol. IV. p. 912.] And how he can be said to free us from hell, or remaining there, who never were there, the same Fa¬ ther, in the same place tells us: Quemadmodum si medicus videat tibi imminentem aegritudinem, forte ex aliquo labore, et dicit, parce tibi, sic te tracta, requiesce, hisce cibis utere, nam si non feceris segrotabis; tu autem si feceris salvus eris, recte dicis medico liberasti me ab aegritu- dine, non in qua jam eras, sed in qua futurus eras. Nescio quis ha- bens causam molestam, mittendus erat in carcerem, venit alius, defen- dit eum, gratias agens quid dicit ? Eruisti animam meam de carcere; suspendendus erat debitor, solutum est pro eo, liberatus dieitur de sus- pendio. In his omnibus non erant; sed quia talibus meritis agebantur ut nisi subventum esset ibi essent: inde se recte dicunt liberari, quo per liberatores non sunt permissi per- duci. Ibid. [18. p. 913 ] Ill 131 Of the going down of Christ into Hell. in more than one state at one time : when he was in a state of humiliation he was in a state of humiliation, not of exal¬ tation ; when in a state of exaltation he was in a state of exaltation, not of humiliation. In one of which estates he purchased salvation for us, in the other he applies it to us. And therefore there can be no need of making a mixed estate, unless it be to build the error upon it, that Christ went not to hell, but heaven. And therefore, until it can be proved that there is more necessity than that of holding a mixed estate of Christ, wherein part of him for a time was exalted, and part of him debased, (which I believe can never be,) we cannot but maintain that the soul was in a state of humiliation, as well and as long as the body, and so not in heaven when this was upon earth, but under earth in hell, whilst his body was under earth in the grave. And when one rose they both rose; the soul being fetcht from hell to be united again to its body. But in few words, to put this question out of question, that the soul of Christ was not in heaven, (but therefore in hell,) in the third place, our Saviour himself, who best knows when he first ascended up to heaven, tells us plainly, the third day after his death, being the day of resurrection, that he was not then ascended up to heaven, saying to Mary, Touch me not , for I am not yet ascended to my Father , John xx. 17. Which certainly cannot be meant only of his body, but of his soul also, or rather both soul and body together. For if either of them, especially if his soul had been ascended to his Father, I cannot see how he could have said, I am not yet ascended to my Father , for the soul is the principal part whence the whole is denominated; and so, whatsoever the soul doth, the whole person is looked upon as doing: as when our souls go to heaven, we are said to go thither. And therefore might Christ, if his soul had been then in heaven, better have said, I am now descended from my Father, than I am not yet ascended to my Father; for he had ascended and come down again. But we cannot, we dare not, but believe, that Christ meant really as he spake, that he then was not ascended to his Father, that the human nature which he assumed upon earth was not as yet gone up to heaven, but one part of it had been in hell, the other in the k 2 132 Of the going down of Christ into Hell. Art. grave; and being both joined together again, the whole human nature appeared visibly to Mary after his resurrection, as it had done before his passion. Whence we cannot but judge, that if we weigh things in the equal balance of un¬ biassed reason, we must needs believe that the soul of Christ, when breathed from his body upon his cross on earth, went not up to his crown in heaven, but stayed in hell until the time that it was to be tied to its body again, that as both had been all along together in a state of humiliation upon earth, so both might go together to his estate of exaltation in heaven. And if from producing arguments for this truth we go on to consider such as have been produced against it, we shall not find any thing very material. Indeed there is scarce any thing that looks like an argument against it: only there are two scriptures, and but two only, that they make use of to batter it; and they are, first, the words of our Saviour to the thief, Verily I say unto thee , To-day slialt thou he with me in paradise , Luke xxiii. 43. But surely they were much busied that had not leisure to consider what it is to be with Christ in paradise, and so, what our Saviour meant when he pro¬ mised the thief he should be that day with him in paradise ; certainly he did not promise him that he should be with his soul, or with his body, but with his Deity h . It is that that h Est autem sensus multo expedi- tior et ab his omnibus ambiguitati- bus liber, si non secundum id quod homo erat, sed secundum id quod Deus erat dixisse accipiatur, hodie mecum eris in paradiso. Homo quippe Christus illo die secundum carnem in sepulchro, secundum ani- mam in inferno futurus erat; Deus vero idem ipse, Christus ubique semper est. Aug. epist. [187. 7. vol. II. p. 680J ad Dardan. de prse- sentia Dei. Sicut ergo potuit recte dici Dominus glorise crucifixus, cum ad solam carnem ilia passio pertine- ret; ita recte dici potuit, hodie me¬ cum eris in paradiso, cum juxta humanam .hrnnibtatem per carnem in sepulchro, per animam in inferno illo die futurus esset, juxta divinam vero immutabilitatem nunquam de paradiso, quia ubique est semper, recessisset. Ibid. [9.] Qui enim homini poenaliter pendenti et salu- briter confitenti ait: Hodie mecum eris in paradiso, secundum id quod homo erat, anima ejus ipso die fu- tura fuerat in inferno, caro in sepul¬ chro ; secundum autem id quod deus erat, utique et in paradiso erat. Et ideo latronis anima a pristinis fascinoribus absoluta et illius mu* nere jam beata, quamvis ubique sicut ille esse non poterat, tamen etiam ipso die cum illo in paradiso poterat, unde ille qui ubique semper est non recesserat. Id. in Joh. tract. hi. [2. vol. III. par.ii. pp. 780, 78!.] III. Of the going down of Christ into Hell . 133 maketh paradise to be paradise; and if the thief had been that day with his soul, without his Godhead, or the enjoy¬ ment of the Divine nature, he could not be said to be in para¬ dise. So that to be with Christ in paradise is plainly no more than to be in heaven; for he that is in heaven must needs be with Christ in paradise, and he that is with Christ in paradise must needs be in heaven. And so I believe was Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob with Christ in paradise before his birth and incarnation; and so might the thief be immediately after his death and passion. For though his human nature was not there, yet his Divine nature was ; and so the very same person that was at that time with the thief upon the cross was there, though the nature he had assumed into that person was not; and that certainly was all our Saviour did; more than which he could not promise to the thief when he said, that that day he should be with him in paradise. The other place is that of St. Luke, where our Saviour, as he was giving up the ghost, crieth out, Father , into thy hands I commend my spirit , Luke xxiii. 46. From hence they argue, that the spirit of Christ being committed into the hands of God, it must needs go to heaven. But I wonder, whether the hands of God could not reach into hell as well as heaven : v I make my bed in hell , saith David, behold , thou art there , Psalm cxxxix. 8. And why might not the spirit of Christ be com¬ mended into the hands of God, though it should go to hell, as well as if it should have gone to heaven l May we not com¬ mit our bodies into the hands of God, which perhaps may lie many years rotting in their graves, as well as our souls, that go immediately to him ? Nay, certainly, seeing Christ went to hell, he may well be thought to have more need to com¬ mend his spirit into the hands of God, that he might protect and defend it in the midst of so many devils and hellish fiends. So that when our Saviour Christ saith, Father , into thy hands I commend my spirit , what is it more than this, Father, seeing my spirit is now going from earth to hell, I commend it into thy hands, that thou mayest preserve it in hell as thou hast on earth l And so these words, instead of fighting against us, seem to be clearly on our side ; and these two places failing, 184 Of the going down of Christ into Hell. Art. I know not of any other that can be brought to enervate this truth, that Christ descended into hell. Neither is this a truth of yesterday's growth, but almost all the Fathers of the primitive church have acknowledged and received it as an article of their faith. Though they much differ about the end of his going, yet that he did go thither they all agree. Some said he went to preach, others to loose whom himself thought fit, others to triumph over his con¬ quered enemy the Devil, but all affirm that he did go to hell. But passing by many others, I shall only pack one jury of them that bring in their verdict for this truth. And the foreman is Ignatius', who saith expressly, “ He descended into hell alone, but ascended with a multitude." The next is Clemens Alexandrinus, whose opinion was not only that he descended, but that he descended on purpose to preach to the spirits there detained, saying, k “ The Lord therefore descended for no other end, but only to preach the gospel, either to all, or else to the Jews only;" and adds 1 , “ That at that time things were so ordered in hell, that all the souls that there heard the preaching, might either manifest their repentance, or acknowledge their punishment to be just, because they did not believe." The next is Tertullian, who saith m , “ The God Christ, being also a man, and dying according to the scriptures, and being buried also according to the same, he satisfied this law also undergoing the manner of an human death in hell." The fourth is famous Athanasius 11 , who tells us, “ Christ was buried ; his soul, that went to hell, but seeing it could not i Kai KaTrjXOev els qdrjv povos, dvrjXOe be j uterci 7 rXr'fovs. Ignat. Epist. ad Trallianos, [p. 74.] k Ei y ovv 6 Kvptos 8t ovbev ere- pov as aoov Karr]Ku€v 9 rj ota to tv- ayyeXlaaaOai, eocnrep KarrjXOev rjrot ttcivtcls evayyeXlo-aadat, r) povovs 'E/3- paiovs. Clem. Alex. Strom. 1. 6. [6. pp. 763, 4.] ^ ^ 1 O vft Ka\ ev qdov 7) ctvTTj yeyovev oLKOvopla, iva KaKei yraacu at xf/vxat aKovaaaai tov KrjpvypaTOS Tt)v peTa- votav evbel^tovTat, rj rr)v KoXaatv dt- 03 V OVK €TTL(TT(V(TaV 6 pO~ Kuxav ewat 81 r XoyrjtroCKri. Ibid. [p. 765.] m Christus Deus quia et homo moi’tuus secundum scripturas, et sepultus secus easdem, huic quoque legi satisfecit forma humanse mortis apud inferos functus. Tertul. de anima, c. 55. 11 Tdfprj 7rapeboOr], yeyovev rj yf/vxp Kara tov abrjv, Kal KpaTrjOrjvat prj bv- vrjdetcra ttciXlv cnreboOrj r«y c rcopan, /cai yeyovev r) dvdarao'LS. Athanas. de duabus in Christo naturis, [vol. II. p. 567.] 135 III. Of the going down of Christ into Hell. be held there, it was restored to his body, and so he rose again / 1 The fifth is St. Hilary 0 , who saith, “ It is the law of human necessity that their bodies being buried, their souls should descend to hell; which descent the Lord did not refuse for the consummation of a real man, viz. that he might do for man whatsoever man was bound of necessity to do . 11 The sixth is St. Ambrose P; u Though the soul of Christ was in the abyss of hell, yet now it is not, because it is writ¬ ten, Thou wilt not leave my soul in hellT The seventh is St. Basil, who upon those words, But God will redeem my sold from the power of the grave , (or from the hand of hell, as this Father translates it,) for he shall receive me, saithd, “ He clearly foretelleth the descent of the Lord into hell; who shall redeem this prophet’s soul with others that it may not remain there .* 1 The eighth is St. Hierome, who saith “ Hell is a place of punishments and of torments, where the rich man that was used to be clothed in purple was seen: whither also the Lord descended, that he might loose those from prison that were bound there . 11 And again s : “For none is delivered from hell but only by the grace of Christ, and therefore did Christ descend thither after his death. As the angel descended into the furnace at Babylon to deliver the three children, so did Christ descend into the furnace of hell, where the souls of the just were shut up . 11 ° Humanse ista lex necessitatis est, ut sepultis corporibus ad inferos animee descendant, quam descensio- nem Dominus ad consummationem veri hominis non recusavit. Hilar. Enar. in Psal. cxxxviii. [22. p. 514.] p Ipsa anima Christi etsi fuit in abysso, jam non est, quia scriptum est, non derelinques animam meam in inferno. Ambros. de incarn. c. 5. [42. vol. II. p. 713.] <1 JXkqv 6 Qeos \vTpo)CT€Tcu rr) v \frv- Xqv pov e< xeipos adov, or civ Xapftavrj pc. 2a(jf>o)s' npocpr/Tevei ri) v roO Ku- piov Kadodov rijv els aSou, os perct tcov nXXoov Kcti avrov XvrpaxreTCU tov 1 rpo- ]S cnrujTovvTa tov paSr/Tpv evvorjaov tov 8eanoTOV Tpv (fuXctvdpomLai>, ncos Kai inrep pLas \f/vx?}s 8eiKvvaiv eavrov rpavpara e^ovra, Chrysost. in Joh. horn. 87. [vol. II. p. 923.] At a tovto avtarrj e^v ra arjpela tov aravpov. Ibid. [p. 924.] r 'Q,cnvep OVV €7t\ T(bv KVpUTCOV 7repL7TClTOVVTa Secopovvres npo tov aravpov, ov \e- yopev aXXrjs (jivaecos to acopa eicelvo dWa Tr/s r)n eT *P as ovtoo perci rrjv dvdaraaLV avrov opcovres tovs TV 7 rovs e^ovTa, ovk epovpev avrov (pSaprov eivai \oinov' 81a yap tov paSpTrjv ravra evebeiicvvTO. Ibid. defApece, 7 roSev to ( 3 \da(})r)pov e8i8d)(6r)? ; 7ro - Sev epaSes a KrjpvTTeis; Xpiarov Xdcprjaas cos eye 0 ( Qcopds ) ; Tpv X € ^P a irpoapveyKas’, tovs tvttovs rjp^^o-as; Id. els rov dyiov 0c opdv, vol. V. p. 488. Ata tovto Ka\ tvttovs edeiKW 7rXt]ycbv' Cyril. Alex, de Trinit. c. 17. [vol. VI. ad fin. p. 23.] But St. Ambrose goeth -higher, and saith, “ Fie did not only arise with them, but ascend with them too.” Nam quomodo non corpus in quo manebant insignia vulnerum, ves¬ tigia cicatricum, quae Dominus pal- panda obtulit, in quo non solum fidem firmat, sed etiam devotionem acuit. Quod vulnera suscepta pro IV. Of the Resurrection of Christ. 143 God , ver. 28. After he had touched him, he perceived him to be the same man, and, by consequence, c God too. He believed him to be the same man, because he could touch him; and God, because that body which he touched was raised from the dead. And so Thomas's former unbelief maketh much for the confirmation of our faith d . But, 7, after this the disciples saw him again at the sea of Tiberias , John xxi. 1, 2, &c. 8. They saw him again immediately before his ascension, Luke xxiv. 36; Acts i. 9- And at this time it is observable, the disciples had clear evidences of the reality, not only of his body, but his soul too; for he e ate and drank with them, and so manifested his vegetative soul, Luke xxiv. 43 ; he discoursed with them, which he could not do, unless he heard them speaking unto him, and so by that he mani¬ fested his sensitive soul; and he reasoned also with them, saying unto .them, These are the words which I said unto you whilst I was yet with you , that all things must be fidjilled which are written in the law of Moses , and in the Prophets , and in the Psalms , concerning me. And again, Thus it is written , and thus it behoved Christ to suffer , and to rise from the dead the nobis ccelo inferre raaluit, abolere noluit, ut Deo Patri nostrae pretia libertatis ostenderet. Ambros. in Luc. xxiv. [lib. X. 170. vol. I. p. 1540.] Y. et Gregor. Magn. in evangel, hom. 29. [vol. I. p. 1568.] c Videbat tangebatque hominem, et confitebatur Deum, quem non videbat neque tangebat. Sed per hoc quod videbat atque tangebat, illud jam remota dubitatione cre- debat. Aug. in Job. tract. 121. [5. vol. III. par. ii. p. 809.] : and therefore doth St. Chrysostome also bring in St. Thomas, saying, ’E£77- nXcocra perci tcov daKTvXcov, koI to tt)s y\rvxr)s oppa, Kal dvo Xonrdv evepyeico v rjcrBopr] v' iicpciTovv ecopcov, Kai rrj pev X el p' L crcbpa Kareixov, rrj de \^vxp Qeov Kcirevoovv. Chrysost. in St. Thom. vol. V. [p. 488.] d Non enim propter se tantum hoc operatus est beatus apostolus, sed quod sibi gessit cunctis pro- ficit. Cum suam enim exercuit so- licitudinem fidem omnium confir- mavit. Serm. de tempore, [162. vol. V. App. p. 287.] Ille enim dubitando vulnerum cicatrices tetigit et de nostro pectore dubitationis vulnus amputavit. Greg. Mag. in evang. hom. 29. ^Hv de dpa kcu tovto Ttjs Belas oiKovoplas pvarrjpiov to prj napelvai tov Qcopav Tore, el yap 7 raprjv, ovk dv r)P ( fi lo '@b Tr l (r€V ' de prj dfL(j)e(3aXev, ovk dv e^rjXd^aev' el de ovk eprjXaefyrjo-ev, ovk dv ovtcos enl- o-Tevcrev’ el de prj ovtcos eivlaTevaev, ovk dv fjpds ovtco 7na-Teveiv edlda^ev. dxrTe Kal 1) dma-Tia tov paBrjTOV tt)s bpeTepas 7ris pb Tr lP y*y*vrjTai. Chrys. els tov ayiov dnoaToXov Oco- pdv. Vol. V. p. 837. e UaBlov 6 Kvpios Kal Bavcov Kal Tacpels dneTivdtjaTO tt)v v peT avTcov. Cyril. Alex, de Trinit. c. 17, [ad fin. vol. VI. p. 23.] 144 Of the Resurrection of Christ. Art. third day , ver. 44, 46; and this was a clear discovery of his rational soul too. And last of all he was seen of Paul also, as one horn out of due time, 1 Cor. xv. 8. And these are the witnesses chosen before of God , which he shewed himself openly unto, Acts x. 40, 41; and of these men it was that Peter saith, One must he ordained to he a witness icith the apostles of his resurrection , chap. i. 22. But these were all the friends of Christ, and so their testimony may not be thought perhaps so valid in this case. And therefore, to take away all ob¬ jections, St. Matthew relates how the very Adversaries of Christ attested this truth; for some of the watch came into the city, and shewed unto the chief priests all that were done , Matt, xxviii. 11. And that the things they told them was, that he whom they had crucified the day before the passover was now risen again from the dead, is clear, from the issue of their consultation about the matter, for they gave large money unto the soldiers, saying, Say ye , His disciples came hy night , and stole him away while we slept, ver. 12,13. If the soldiers had not told them he was risen of himself, what need had they to have bribed them to say he was stolen away by his disciples ? And thus have we this great truth, that Christ rose from the dead, attested both by his friends and enemies; both by those that believed in him, and also by those that scoffed at him. f Aia rovrovs tovs o-TparidoTas 6 (reurfxos exe^vos eyevero, wore avrovs exnXrjI-ai, xa\ nap avrcov yevecrBai tt] v paprvpiav. 'Onep ovv xal avvefir]’ xai yap dvvnonros 7) anayyeXLa ovtcos eyevero napa tu>v (pvXdxiov npo(J)epo- rfj oixovpevi] ra 8e I8la to is exei na- povaiv ibt'iKWTO' xoivy pev tt} olxov- pevT) to ctkotos' 18[a 8e to tov ayye- Xov xa\ tov creicrpov' end ovv rjXOov xa\ dnrjyyeiXav (r) yap aXrjBeia napa t&v ivavrioiv dvaKrjpvTTopevrj 8iaXap- nei) e8u>Kav naXiv apyvpia' Chry- sost. in Mat. Horn. 90. init. [vol. II. p. 549.] And that the watch did see Christ rising from the grave, Pilate certified Tiberius in his epistle which (it is thought) he wrote unto him; telling him, amongst other things concerning Christ, Crucifix- erunt igitur ilium, et sepulchro quo conditus erat custodes adhibuerunt, inter quos etiam ex meis militibus nonnulli erant qui tertio die ipsum a mortuis resurgentem viderunt. Pont. Pilat. Epist. ad Tiber. Neron. Imp. extat in monum. patrum, p. 2. [vol. I. ed. Grynaeo.] And Nicodemus, in the Gospel attributed to him, saith, that some of the watch said in the synagogue. Quia nobis custo- dientibus monumentum Jesu facta est terreemotio, et vidimus angelum Dei quomodo revolvit monumenti lapidem et sedebat super eum, et aspectus ejus erat sicut fulgur et vestimentum ejus sicut nix. Et prae timore eflfecti sumus velut mortui. Et audivimus angelum dicentem IV. Of the Resurrection of Christ. 145 And the scripture having left on record the testimony of so many witnesses for the confirmation of this truth, there is nothing left for reason to do in the case, (it being a matter of fact,) but, first, to shew that the body that those witnesses saw Christ have, after his resurrection, was the selfsame body that he had before his passion; and, secondly, to examine the plea that the high-priest and elders invented to cloak and palliate the business withal. As for the first, that the body which Christ appeared in after, was the same that he had before he was crucified, is clear. First, from Mary's knowing him by his voice: Jesus saith unto her , Mary: she turnetli herself \ and saiih unto him , Rabboni , John xx. 16. He had no sooner called her by her name, but she knew him by his voice; which is a plain argument that the organs of his body, whereby he spake, were the same now that they were before, and so his body the same; the distinction of our voices proceeding from the difference there is in the organs or instruments of our bodies that we speak by; so that where the organs of our bodies are different, the voice cannot be the same; and where the voice is the same, the organs cannot be different. Secondly, as it appears from Mary's knowing him by his voice, so also from the apostles' knowing of him by his visage, John xx. 20. xxi. 12; for this shews that not only the organs or instruments of speech, but the whole shape of his body, and all the lineaments of his face, were the same now that they werebefore ; these being the several marks whereby one man is always known from an¬ other. Lastly, to name no Smore, this clearly appears from mulieribus ad sepulchrum Jesu, Nolite timere, scio quod Jesum quae- ritis crucifixum, hie surrexit sicut prsedixit. Venite et videte locum ubi positus erat; et cito euntes di- cite discipulis ejus quia surrexit a mortuis et praecedet vos in Gali- laeam, ibi eum videbitis sicut dixit vobis. Nicod. Evang. de Pass, et Resur. [Ibid. vol. I. p. 649.] s Another proof of the identity of our Saviour’s body after, with that it was before his resurrection, might be brought from the words of our Saviour to Thomas, Behold « BEVERIDGE. my hands, and my feet, and my side j from whence the Fathers, as I be¬ fore have shewed, conclude that the print and footsteps of the wounds our Saviour had in his hands, and feet, and side, remained also after his resurrection ; by which St. Tho¬ mas could no longer doubt, whether it was the same body or no. Many testimonies of the Fathers I have before cited, to which we may add that also of St. Chrysostome, where he brings in Christ saying to Tho¬ mas, 'Of en vpmdfav, iv r«if f’puf \epcr'u> avayv&Oi yeypappevci rn %ov 146 Of the Resurrection of Christ. Art. the words of the angels to the women, Why seek ye the living among the dead ? he is not here, but is risen, Luke xxiv. 5, 6; as also from what the soldiers told the elders, that the body that they watched, being the same body that was nailed to the cross the day before the passover, was now risen out of the place where it was laid. So that the selfsame body that was laid there the day before the passover, the selfsame body was raised thence the day after. But let us now, in the second place, set upon the examina¬ tion of what the soldiers, being bribed by the elders, reported among the Jews, to hide this so great a mystery from them, that so it might not have any effectual work upon them. Christ, whilst living amongst them, had frequently forewarned them of his resurrection, that he must rise again the third day, Mark viii. 352; and, Destroy this temple, and in three days h I will raise it up, John ii. 19; which, and the like expressions, stuck foully in the Jews 1 stomachs after he was dead. And therefore the chief priests and scribes came together to Pilate, saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet living. After three days I will rise again. Command there¬ fore, that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day, lest his disciples come by night, and steal him away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead: so the last error shall be worse than the first. Matt, xxvii. 62, 63. Pilate said unto them, You (Kovcrlov pov TidOovs rpavpara' na- parldrjpL aoi iravra pov ra pe\r] 7 rpos epevvav' ovk alcrxyvopai rov a toparos pov tovs pooiXconas' ovk aldovpai rrjs crapKos pov ra rpavpara anep Kare- he^aprjv bia ra vperepa rpavpara' Chrysost. els rov dyiov dnoar. 0c0- pav, vol. V. p. 839. h In three days, or after three days, i. e. the third from the day wherein it is destroyed, according to the expression immediately fore¬ going, he must rise again the third day, counting the day wherein he suffered to be the first. And in this sense also he calls the space he was to continue in the state of death three days and three nights, Matt, xii. 40, though it was but one whole day and two pieces; and herein he spake according to the dialect of the Jews themselves, to whom he spake. For both the Talmuds, disputing about the three days that the Is¬ raelites were not to come at their wives before the giving of the law, Exod. xix, 15, say; but R. Eliezer Ben Azariah saith, mis dv non' nhoo non nspm, “ A day and a night make a non'; and a part of a non is accounted as a whole non.” Schab. per. 9. So here a day and a night make one natural day, and two parts of days are accounted as two whole days. And thus it was that the Fathers loosed this knot. Nam et ipsum triduum quo Dominus mortuus est et resurrexit, nisi isto loquendi modo quo a parte totum dici solet. IV. Of the Resurrection of Christ. 147 have a watch ; go your way , make it as sure as you can , ver. 65. And so, they having gotten leave of Pilate, they presently went and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone , and setting a watch , ver. 66. The watch being set, did faithfully dis¬ charge the trust committed to them, watching all night at the sepulchre, that none might steal away the body that lay there. But notwithstanding all their care and watchfulness, in the morning they found the body gone; and that for all that they could do, it did fall out as he had foretold; for he was indeed risen from the dead. Upon this they haste to the chief priests and Pharisees, from whom they had received their command, and acquaint them with the business, which caused them immediately to call a council to consult what to do in this case, who, after some debate about the matter, resolved to corrupt the soldiers with large sums of money, that they might not tell the truth of the business; but to report it about, that the disciples stole him away while they slept , Matt, xxviii. 12, 13. The soldiers, preferring the money, it seems, before their credit, noise it abroad accordingly, that the disciples of Christ stole him away while they slept: which how unlikely and incredible a thing it is that they should do, let any one judge, that doth but consider these following particulars. First, Is it probable, that the disciples, a company of fear¬ ful * cowards, that had all run away from their master when recte intelligi non potest. Aug. [vol. III. par. ii. p. 135.] De consensu Evang. 1 . 3. [66.] Ipsum autem triduum non totum et plenum fuisse ipsa scriptura testis est; sed primus dies a parte extrema totus annume- ratus est; dies vero tertius a parte prima et ipse totus; medius autem inter eos, id est, secundus dies ab¬ solute totus viginti quatuor horis suis, duodecim nocturnis et duode- cim diurnis. Id. de Trinit. 1 . 4. [to. vol. VIII. p. 815.] Hoc solum quae- rimus, Quomodo tres dies et tres noctes fuerit in corde terrae. Qui- dam 7 rapa yap cra(3- ftaTco TvpocjeXOovres l)Tr)cravTo napa tov ntXdroi; rrjv KovarcobiciP, feat e’0u- XaTTOi/' rrjv be 7vpd>Trjv vvKra ovbe'is tovtcov rep rd^xw napr/v. Id. in Mat. Horn. 90. vol. II. p. 550. [24.] 1 A 160s eneKeiro peyas 7ro\\ciov 8eo- pevos x €L P“> v > Chrysost. in Mat. Horn. 90. [Ibid. p. 550. 15.] This Stone the Jews call and there¬ fore R. Ben Maimon saith, bbu Q'nnn laJiDD’ ’iDDn snn, ;t Golal is the covering wherewith they cover the dead,” in Ohol. c. 2. [fol. isp] And that it was a great stone, Obadias de Bartenora ex¬ pressly, mrrn rona ps b'mrr ptrbo nbrrsbn 'iipn ’D niD'amot psn nx “ Golal is a great and wide stone wherewith they cover the mouth of the sepulchre, upon the top of it, from that place of scrip¬ ture, They rolled away the stone” Gen. xxix. 3. IV. Of the Resurrection of Christ. 149 ing sheet decently wrapped up in one place, and the napkin, or kerchief, that was upon his head, in another place by itself, as we read they were, John xx. 6, 7 ? Certainly, at such a time, they must needs have been in more haste than to spend their time in such needless curiosities as they were; espe¬ cially, considering that he was wound up in a linen cloth, with beaten myrrh, and cassia, and other spices, which were of a clammy and m sticking nature, and so would require much time and pains too to strip him of, John xix. 40. Fourthly, suppose the body was indeed gone, yea, stolen away by some that had courage and leisure to do the feat, yet how did they know it was the disciples that did it ? They profess themselves that they were asleep, and how could they then n know who it was that so surprised them, while they slept ? Fifthly, sup¬ pose further, that it was the disciples that indeed stole him away, is it credible that they durst go and say they did it whilst they slept? When Peter was miraculously delivered out of prison by an angel, the keepers that were set to watch him being examined and found guilty, (though alas! they were as far from being guilty of letting Peter go out of prison, as these were of letting Christ’s body be stolen by his dis¬ ciples,) I say, being, though upon unjust and false grounds m A id yap tovto npokafiwv 6 ’loodvvqs (pqcr'iv oti crpvpvq crvuerdcfiT] 7 toWt}, q po\v(38ov ovx qTTov avy- fcoXXa tco adtpan ra ddovia’ iv drav aKovaps on tci aov8apia ckcito I8iq, pq dvdar^rj tgov Xeydvrcov on euXanq" ov yap ovtcos avdqTos qv 6 kKcutcov, a>ff nepl Tvpaypa 7 repirrov TocravTqv dvaXlaKciv cnrov8qv. Chrysost. in Joh. Xoy. 7T6. vol. II. p. 916. Ma- Xnrra 8c on apvpva qv, (pappaKov ovtco /coXXcoSes' r ’Irjaovv Xpiardv ck veKpdiv dvaarrjcras. Clem. Epist. ad Corinth, pp. 33, 34. r ’Eycb Se (ovk iv ra yevvdcrdcu Ka'i aravpovvOai yivoovKco avrov iv aoopari yeyovivai povov, dXkd ) Ka'i pera rrjv avdcrracnv iv vapid, avrov oida, Ka\ Tnvrevco ’dvra' nal ore npos rovs 7rep\ Uerpdv fjXdev, es cnrXovv Kal atcepaiov ev8eiKvvpevos, el prj eniaijs eicelvco yevoivro, 8ie8eiKvv, rj Kiara eXeye rrjs Krjpvrropevrjs (BaaiXelas eVtrv^etj/. Niceph. Hist. Eccles. 1. 2. c. 35. [vol. I. p. 192.] y Kcu yap 6 K upios ar^eSoi/ pe%pis ecrnepas epeivev eul tov £vXov, Kal 7 rpds ecnrepav eBa\f/av avrov' elra dvearr) rfj rplrr] r/pepa. Justin. Dial, cum Tryph. [97. p. 193.] z T rjv 8e tov rjXlov rjpepav Koivfj navres rrjv avveXevaiv TroiovpeBa’ €Trei8r) TTpcoTt] ecrrlv rjpepa ev fj 6 Qeds to cr kotos Kal rrjv vXrjv rpe\fras Kocrpdv eTvoirjare, Kal ’Irjaovs Xpiaros 6 rjpere- pos crcorrjp TTj avrfj fpepa eK veKpcov dvearr)' rfj yap npo rrjs KpoviKrjs earavpcocrav avrov, Kal rfj perd n)v KpoviKrjv, rjns earrlv rjXlov ijpepa, (Ra¬ vels rols dnoaroXois avrov Kal paBrj - rads e8l8a£e ravra dnep els enicrKe-^nv Kal vplv dve8d>Kapev. Id. pro Christ. Apol. [I. 67. p. 84.] 154 Art. Of the Resurrection of Christ. presseth, though obscurely and paradoxically, yet very acutely and elegantly: “ a The Son of God was born: I am not ashamed of it, because it is a thing to be ashamed of. The Son of God died : this is altogether credible, because it is absurd. And after he was buried he arose again: it is cer¬ tain, because it is impossible.” And Athanasius doth not only assert the truth of his resurrection, but gives the reason also why he rose no sooner, and why he lay no longer than three days, saying, “ But b he suffered not the temple of his body to remain long (in the grave) ; but having shewn only that it was dead, by its conflict with death, upon the third day he presently arose, bringing with him his trophies and victories over death, even incorruptibility and impassibility in his body. He could indeed presently after death have raised up his body, and have shewn it alive again; but our Saviour, well foreseeing the issue, would not do it. For then some might have said he was not truly dead, or not fully struck with death, if he had immediately after death manifested his resurrection : and perhaps also, if there had been no interval betwixt his death and resurrection, the glory of his incorrupt¬ ibility would not have been so manifest. Wherefore, that his body might clearly appear to be dead, the Word tarried one middle day (in the grave); and upon the third day shewed a Natus est Dei Films, non pudet quia pudendum est. Et mortuus est Dei Filius, prorsus credibile est quia ineptum est. Et sepultus re- surrexit, certum est quia impossibile est. Tertul. de carne Christi, [cap. v.] b Toy be eavrov vaov acopa ovk enl 7 toXv peveiv avacrxopevos, aXXd povov deltas veKpov rfj tov davarov npos avro o’vpnXoKj], rpiralov dveo-Tr/aev evdvs, rponaia Kal vlkos Kara tov SavaTOV (foepcov rrjv ev tco alopari ■^evopevrjv dtpSapalav Kal dnaOeiav’ ■qbvvaro pev -ycip nai nap avra tov 0 avarov to crc opa bieyelpai, Kal ndXiv bel£ai £a>v’ dXXd Kal tovto KaXcos npo'ibcov (TOiTTjp ov nenoirjKev’ eine yap av rls prjboXeos avro TedvrjKevai, rj prjbe TeXeov avrov tov davarov e\fsavK€vai, ei nap' aura rrjv dvdrrra- (Tiv t]v embel^as' ra^a be Kal ev tcrw tov biao-rrjparos ovtos rovre davarov Kal Ttjs dvaaraa'ecos, dbijXov eyivero to nep\ ttjs dcfodapcrias kXcos’ odev iva bei^dlj veKpov to acopa Ka\ piav vnepeive pearjv 6 Xo-yoy, Kai rpiralov tovto naoriv ebei^ev acfodaprov’ eveKa pev ovv tov bet^Or/vai tov davarov ev tco aoopari Tpiraiov dvearmjcre tovto’ iva be prj enl noXv biapelvav Kal (fodapev TeXeov vcrrepov dvaarrjcras dnicrTrjSr}, cos ovk avro dXX’ erepov acopa (fiepcov (epeXXe yap av tis Kal bid avrov xP°vov aniarelv too (foaivo- pevco Kal eniXavdaveadai tcov yevope- vcov) bid tovto ov nXeico tcov rpiaov rjpepaov rjvea\eTO, ovbe enl noXv tovs aKovcravras avrov nepl rrjs avaaraaecos napeiXKvaev. Athanas. de incarn. Verbi, [26. vol. I. p. 69.] IV. Of the Resurrection of Christ. 155 it incorruptible unto all. That therefore he might manifest death in his body, he arose the third day. Neither would he suffer his body to be longer detained there and corrupted, lest at the last, when he did rise, he should not be believed to have the same, but another body. (For then it might come to pass, that by reason of the length of the time, they would not believe when he did appear, and that the things that were done should be forgotten.) And for that he would not remain longer than three days; neither would he keep those that had heard him foretelling his resurrection any longer in suspense.” Next to Athanasius comes St. Cyril of Hierusalem; for this was an article of his faith too, that Christ arose from the dead: “ I believe c ” (saith he) “ that Christ was raised from the dead. For, for this I have many witnesses, both out of the Divine scriptures, and from the testimony and operation unto this day of him that rose again.” And St. Chrysostome, “ But d that they may learn, that whilst he was living, what he suffered he suffered willingly; behold the seal, and stone, and custody, and watch, all could not detain him that was dead, but that one thing fell out alone, that even from thence his resurrection was published abroad.” Yea, so that St. Au¬ gustine tells us, “that the resurrection e of Christ, and his ascent into heaven with that body wherewith he arose, is now preached and believed over the whole world; and if it be incredible, how comes it to be believed in all the earth ?” But these, you will say, are all Christians; and therefore it is no wonder if they avouch all this and more of Christ; but where is there a Jew that will say as much? Yes, there is Josephus by name, a Jew by nation and religion too, yet c IhaTevco on Kal XpLCTTos eK veKptov eyrjyeprcu, ttoWcis yap e'xa> rets nepl tovtov papTvplas €K re ra>v Qeieov ypav , Kal A rrjs p^XP 1 pepov tov avacrravTOs paprvpias kgu evepyeias. Cyril. Hieros. Cateches. 14. [9. p. 197".] ^ d ’AXX’ iva pddcoaiv on Kai £a>v €v noiijr^s, didacTKaXos avBpconcov rcov ydovrj t dXrjdrj dexopevoov. Kai ^ roA- \ovs pbv 'lovbaiovs, noWovs 8e Kai 'EX\t]iukovs eTrqydyero. 'O Xpicrros ovros rjv. Kai cwtov e’y§ei£et ru>v npcorwv divbpcov nap' r)p~ iV > crravpco emreTipriKOTOs ITiAarou, ovk enav- (xavro ot ye npwrov dyantjcravres. Ecpdvrj yap avrols rpinjv e^coy rjpepav naXiv £a>y‘ rcoy deuoy 7rpo(f)r)ra)V ravra Kai aAAa pvpia Bavpaaia Tie pi avrov elpijKoroov. Ei's re vvv rd>v XpKrnavodv and rovbe d>vopaapeva)V ovk eneXme rb (pvXov’ o\frea>s rrjs olKelas, iva pr) (fiav- raapa elvai vopiacocri to opcopevov. Chrysost. in Acta apost. hom. i. [vol. IV. p. 6n. 19.] Ad hoc ne- cessaria fuit hujus temporis mora, ut recollectis quos in fugam timor impegerat, quos supplicium crucis terruerat, in multis argumentis ap- parens mentes quae diffidentia titu- baverant solidaret: nec esse phan- tasticum, sed verum corpus quod surrexerattamcomessationibusquam contrectationibus probaret. Ad hoc dilata est ascensionis gloria, ut sub hoc dierum interstitio prsecedens doctrina affectibus firmaretur. Cy¬ prian. Serai, de ascens. Christ, [ad fin. op. Cypr. p. 55.] *ESet pev ovv avvanreadat rfj dvacrTacrei rod trcorrj- po$ ttjv dvobov, Kai tov tov adov vlktj- ttjv, evOvs tov ovpavov vnohe^aaOcu’ «XX’ tva prj to rd^os tcov yuvope vu>v KXeyjsT] ttjv CLLadrjaiv, Trayrjvcu r<5 Xpdva) (3ov\eTcu rols dnoo-ToXoLs 8 lci T tjs deorplas Tti OavpciTa, Kai ttj avv- tmv opparcov npoo-ftoXr}, rfj yf/'vxf} 7 rapa7rep\frai ttjv tvlcttlv. Athanas. in assump. Domini nostri Jesu Christi [5. vol. II. p. 465.] h Et resurgens apparuit discipulis suis : non apparuit inimicis suis, sed discipulis suis. Crucifixus apparuit omnibus, resurgens fidelibus ; ut etiam postea qui vellet crederet, et credenti resurrectio promitteretur. August, in Psal. 65. [6. vol. IV. p. 645.] T LVOS Se 6V€K€V TTaCTlV ciXXd tois «7 rooroXots 1 e(pdvT]; ort (pdv- Taapa dv edotjev eivai toIs 7roXXois ovk eldoai to aTvdppTjTOv tov pvaTrj- plov' el yap Kai avTol oi pa6r)Ta\ tjttujtovv ttjv dpx*]v Kai edopv/ 3 ovvTO, Kai a(f)rjs ederjOrjo-av ttjs did Kai TpaTretjjs, tI tovs noWovs elKos 7 raOelv rjv; Chrysost. in Acta apost. hom. 1. [vol. IV. p. 611. 5.] i Ov yap axnrep 7rpo Ttjs dvauTa- creoos del peT avr&v rjv ovrco Kai rore’ ov yap eine TeaaapciKovTa rjpepas, aXXd 81 rjpepcov TecrcrapaKOVTa’ e(f)l- (TTaTO yap Kai de^icrTaTO ndXiv' tl drjTVOTe; dvdycov avroov Tag diavolas Kai ovk ert crvyxoipcov d polios npds avTOV diaKeladai fbcrnep Kai epnpo- crOev Ibid. [p. 610. 43.] 158 Of the Resurrection of Christ. Art. expired, he is now carried up to heaven to be glorified by God, as he was then carried into the wilderness to be tempted by the Devil. Not as if Christ, as God, thus k ascended from earth to heaven, for as God he never was so in heaven as not to be upon earth, nor so on earth as not to be in heaven at the same time : as God he is included in no place, nor ex¬ cluded out of any, and so is incapable of descending from an higher place to a lower, or ascending from a lower place to a higher. But though not as God, yet he that was God as well as man, in that nature wherein he was man as well as God, was truly and locally translated from these lower parts of the world where we live, unto those higher regions where the angels and glorified saints reside. So that the body of Christ (was not, according to that wild opinion of some of •the heretics of old, left in the sun, but it) was by a true and real local motion conveyed from earth to heaven, so as to be as really and substantially afterwards in heaven, and not on earth, as it was really and substantially before on earth, and not in heaven. Neither did the human nature of Christ thus ascend from earth to heaven presently to descend again from heaven to earth, but thither it ascended, and there it hath remained for above this sixteen hundred years together; and there it now, even at this very moment, sitteth at the right hand of God, and there it will sit until his second coming to judg¬ ment. I say, and there he sitteth at the right hand of God; which words though they be not expressed here, they are in the Creed ; yea, and in the scriptures it is said, He was re¬ ceived up into heaven, and sat at the right hand of God , Mark xvi. 19; which was no more than what David had long k Ascendit ergo ad ccelos, non ubi verbum Deus ante non fuerat, quippe qui erat semper in ccelis et manebat in patre, sed ubi verbum caro factum non sedebat. Ruffin, in expos, symb. [p- 2 5-J . . 1 Of this absurd opinion were the Manicheans of old, according to Gregory Nazianzen: Ilof} yap to crwpa vvv el prj perd tov npoaXafiov- tos ; ov yap dr) Kara rovs M avi\aiorv Xtjpovs tc 5 rj\[(p evanoreOeiTai, Iva Tiprjdr) 8 lci rrjs driplas. Epist. I. ad Cledonium, [vol. I. p. 739.] And the Seleucians and Hermians also, of whom St. Augustine; Negant salvatorem in carne sedere ad dex- tram patris, sed ea se exuisse per- hibent, eamque in sole posuisse, accipientes occasionem de psalmo, In sole posuit tabernaculum suum. August. Hseres. 59. [vol. VIII. p. 20.] IV. Of the Resurrection of Christ. 159 ago foretold of him, saying, m The Lord said unto my Lord , Sit thou at my right hand , until I make thine enemies thy footstool , Heb. i. 13. In which and the like places, by the right hand of God we must not understand it as if God had any right or left hand, as the words signify amongst us; for God, as I have shewn, is a Spirit, having no body or parts, nor by con¬ sequence any right or left hand; but by Christ's sitting at the right hand of God we are to understand (with the "Fathers) m This place of scripture some of the Jews themselves expound of the Messiah; “ids snn "-nm pv "n rvcnn “[bo vuno sib "mpn vnrb *ro»b ’:'-mb ” ns: ":■© iro'b, i. e. R. Joden said in the name of R.Hamah, ‘‘That in time to come the Blessed One will set king Messiah at his right hand, because it is said. The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand.” Midr. Til. Ps. 18. [fol. v v.] Indeed it seems that the Jews in our Saviour’s time did generally acknowledge it to be spoken of the Messiah, otherwise some of them surely would have gainsayed it when our Saviour put this gloss upon it, Luke xx. 42; their silence seems to argue their consent to that interpretation. And the place being so clearly to be understood of Christ, therefore doth the Syriac entitle this Psalm, cioZ.ale jZa*ojo i-i^o.^ aiXiA, jZaalo [xkaaIo i. e. “ A psalm of David concerning the sitting of the Lord, and con¬ cerning his glorious power, and a prophecy concerning the Messiah, and his victory over the enemy.” n Ae£iciv be clkovcov rod Qeov, pr) ronovs a\opa>v aTTOoeoeiKrai, aAA o rjperepos Xp terras ore e< veKpcvv dvecrrr) Ka'i dveftaivev els tov ovpavov, KeXev- ovrat ot ev rots ovpavols rax^evres w to tov Qeov apxovres, dvoltjai rds t rvXa? tcoi/ ovpaveov, iva elaeXdp ovtos os ecrTi (3acnXevs rrj? 8o£r)s, real am/3a? KadtcrT] ev 8e£ia tov rrarpos. Just. Dial, cum Tryph. Jud. [36. p. 134.] Trjv 8e els ovpavovs avo8ov 68o7roid>v dveKatvifce Xeycov 7rdXiv, dpare 7 rvXas ot apxovres vpeov Ka'i errdpOrjre nvXai alcovioi. Athan. de incarn. Verbi, [25. vol. I. p. 69.] Et introibit Rex Gloriae, ut ad dexteram Patris inter- pellet pro nobis. Aug. in loc. [vol. IV. p. 105.] Denique quia novus iste ingressus portarum coeli sedituis et principibus videbatur, videntes naturam carnis ccelorum secreta pe- netrantem, dicunt ad invicem, sic- ut David plenus Spiritu enunciat, Tollite port as principes, &c. Quae vox utique non propter divinitatis potentiam, sed propter novitatem carnis ascendentis ad dexteram Dei ferebatur. Ruffin, in expos, symb. [P- 2 5 -] M BEVERIDGE. 162 Art. Of the Resurrection of Christ. St. Paul, who, speaking of Christ, tells us, Wherefore he saith , when he ascended up on high , he led captivity captive , and gave difts unto men , Eph. iv. 8. It was Christ, who rising from earth to heaven, sent down his gifts from heaven to earth. It was here that he bought them for us; but it is from thence that he poureth them forth upon us. And this place must needs be understood (as after St. Paul the Fathers r generally interpret it) of the ascension of the Messiah, there being no other person that ever did so ascend on high as to lead cap¬ tivity captive and to give gifts to men, but he, who, ascending up to heaven, triumphed over all our spiritual enemies, capti¬ vating sin, Satan, and death, that used to captivate us; and after his ascending up to the right hand of God sent such gifts to the sons of men as we shall presently see he did. We have seen the typical representations and the pro¬ phetical predictions of this in the Old, we now come to consider the positive assertions and historical relations of it in the New Testament. As for the first, Christ before his ascension asserted that he would ascend: Jesus saith unto her , Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: hut go unto my brethren , and say unto them , I ascend unto my Father, and your Father ; and to my God , and your God\ John xx. 17. And what our Saviour said he would do, St. Paul asserts he did, saying, that He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things, Eph. iv. 10. As it was Christ that descended, so was it Christ that ascended. But it is the historical relation of this grand mystery that giveth both the greatest light and testi- r 'OtL € 7 T 67 rpO(f)r]T€VTO tovto peX- Xeiv ylvecrdat vtt avrov pera rrjv els ovpavov dveXevaiv avrov, elnov pev rjd t] Ka\ naXiv Xeyco. E Inev ovv, dveftrj els v\Jsos, rjxpaXcorevcrev alxpa- Xcocrlav, &c. Just. Dial. cumTryph. [87.] Consummatis etenim his quae in terra gerebantur et animabus de inferni captivitate revocatis, ascen- dere memoratur ad ccelos, si cut propheta praedixerat, Ascendens in altum captivam duxit captivitatem. Ruffin, in expos, symb. [p. 25.] Christo ergo sine dubitatione dictum est, Ascendisti in altum , captivasti captivitatem, Aug. in loc. [vol. IV. p. 679.] Quia enim ascensionis ejus mysterium Judaeam non intelligere conspexit, de infidelitate ejus per figuram beatus Job sententiam pro- tulit, dicens, Semitam ignoravit avis, &c. De hac solennitate iterum dicit, Ascendens in altum, captivam duxit captivitatem. Greg, in evang. hom. 29. [10. vol. I. p. 1573.] And though the Chaldee Paraphrase doth interpret it of Moses, snpVo s 'id ited xn'iiM 'EonD, i. e. “ Thou hast ascended up to heaven, thou prophet Of the Resurrection of Christ. 163 IV. mony to it. And that we might be throughly confirmed in it, it is no less than three times recorded to us ; first by St. Mark, who briefly relates it thus: So then , after the Lord had spoken to them , he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God, Mark xvi. 19- Something more fully by St. Luke in his Gospel, And he led them out as far as to Bethany , and he lift up his eyes and blessed them. And it came to pass while he blessed them, he was parted from them , and carried up to heaven, Luke xxiv. 50. But fullest of all by the same St. Luke in his history of the Acts of the Apostles, where it is left on record, that this Christ shewed himself alive to his apostles after his passion, and that he was seen of them forty days, at the end whereof he had assembled them together, instructing them in the things pertaining to the kingdom of God; And when he had spoken these things , while they beheld , he was taken up , and a cloud received him out of their sight. And whilst they looked steadfastly towards heaven as he went up, behold two men stood by them in white apparel, which also said , Ye men of Galilee , why stand ye gazing into heaven ? This same Jesus , which is taken from you into heaven , shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven , Acts i. 9—11. In which words we have these things observ¬ able. First, that Christ did really ascend: he was realty taken away from the apostles he was conversing withall, and that upwards, for they saw that he that was talking with them before, is taken up from them now. Secondly, that it was into heaven that he ascended; which that we might be assured of, the inhabitants of that glorious place, the citizens of that New Jerusalem, come down to acquaint us. The apo¬ stles saw he was taken up, but whither he went they could not see; their eyes could reach no further than the cloud Moses, thou hast led captivity cap¬ tive, thou hast taught the precepts of the law;” [Ps. lxviii. 19.] yet his own translation is a sufficient argument against that interpretation, rendering the Hebrew by for if nnoi rv^y, “ Thou hast ascended on high,” be the same with y'pn 1 ? «np^D, “Thou hast as¬ cended to heaven,” (as certainly it is,) it cannot possibly be understood of Moses, who is never read to have ascended thither. And besides this, □ •no is an expression attributed to none but God ; and therefore by this very paraphrast is it rendered "aw «oviQ, “the highest heavens,” the seat of God alone. Psalm lxxi. 19. xciii. 4 : so that none can be said to ascend nv'itD 1 ?, but only he who is truly God. c 2 /V 164 Of the Resurrection of Christ. Art. he rode in: what afterwards became of him they could not tell. But to resolve them, the great God, as Christ ascended up to heaven, caused two angels to descend down to earth, to 8 assure them of the place he was carried to, saying to them, This same Jesus that is taken from you into heaven; and so shewing them that it was indeed into heaven that he was taken, and fc comforting them also in this their seeming loss of so good a friend, by telling them that he shall so come in like manner as they saw him go into heaven. Though he was gone, he would come again; though they were for the present deprived of his company, yet it was not long but they should enjoy it again, beholding him come down again from heaven to earth, as they now saw him go up from earth to heaven. Thirdly, it is here observable that the apostles saw him ascend u : they did not see him when he rose from earth, but they saw him when he ascended to heaven. And indeed there 8 Ei? tov ovpavov dvaXapfiaveTai' 7 roXv be to biaoTTjpa rjv, Kal ovk rjpKei r) bvvapis ttjs ijperepas b\f/ecos acopa dvaXap(3av6pevov Ibeiv pexP L pavedv' aXXa KaOdnep nereivov els v\jsos Inrapevov, oaeonep av els vyj/os dveXOrj, ToaovTco pdXXov anoKpvnTe- tcu arro ttjs i]perepas o\Jseeos’ ovtco brj kcu to aeopa eieelvo oaeonep av els v\jsos dvrjei, roaovreo paXXov enpimre- to , ovk apKovarjs Trjs aaOeveias Teov otfidaXpeov napaKoXovSrjaai rep pijKei rod biaaTrjpaTOs' bid tovto napei- OTrjKeiaav ol ayyeXoi bibaaKovres ttjv els tov ovpavov avobov. Chrysost. hom. de ascens. Domini, [vol. V. p. 600. 28.] ’E 7 reibav ovk dpKovaiv ol oepOaXpol bei£ai to v\fsos, ovbe nai- bevaai 7 rorepov els tov ovpavov avrjX- 6ev, rj cos els t6v ovpavov, opa ti yive- rai; oti pev avTos eaTiv 6 ’ \rjaovs , jjbeoav lov bieXeyero npos avTOVs (noppeoOev yap ovk evrjv Ibovras yveo- vai) 6ti be els tov ovpavov avaXapfta- verai, avrol Xoinov eblbaoKov ol ay¬ yeXoi. Id. in Act. Apost. hom. 2. vol. iv. p. 618. [27.] 4 Ottos' ydp, viaKov (ovbe yap el%e Tiva napeanoTa Kal Xeyovra oti ndXiv fjijei ’HXta?) iva ovv prj tovto noirjaeoaiv ovtoi, bid tovto ol ayyeXoi napeioTtjKeioav napapv- Sovpevoi ttjv aOvplav. Id. hom. de ascensione Domini, [pag. cit.] Cum ergo eum discipuli tanto lumine perculsi non viderent, et curiosos oculos jubar rubidum coruscis icti- bus evitaret, confestim ex victoribus angeli directi duo, mStu et dolore prostratos apostolos verbis talibus consolantur, Viri Galilcei quid statist &c. Serm. [iv. in ascen. Dom. clxxix. 1. Aug. vol. V. App. p. 3°4-] u BXe 7 rdi/Tcoi/ pev yap ovk aveanj, fiXeTTOvTcov be enijpdrj. eneibav ovbe evTavOa 37 oyfsis to ndv iaxvae. Kai yap ttjs avaaTaaecos to pev TeXos elbov, ttjv be dpfpv ovk en. Kal Trjs dvaXr]\lreoos ttjv pev dpx^jv elbov, to be TeXos ovk€ti‘ irapeiXKe yap eKeivo to ttjv dpxrjv Ibeiv, avrov tov tovto epdeyyopevov napovTOs, Kal tov pvrj- paTos brjXovvTos, oti ovk cotiv €Kei' dXXd to pera tovto Xoyeo ebei paOeiv. Chrysost. in Acta Apost. hom. 2. vol. IV. p. 618. IV. Of the Resurrection of Christ. 165 was no need of their seeing him rising, because they were to see him when risen: but there was need they should see him when ascending, because they were to see him no more as yet when once ascended. And therefore it is that he was not immediately snatcht out of their sight, but ascended x by degrees; for it is said, And while they looJced steadfastly towards heaven as he went up , implying that they saw him going farther and farther from them, until he was gone quite out of their sight; and then had messengers presently sent from heaven, to acquaint them with his arrival there. Lastly, it is observable from these words, that Christ did not only ascend to heaven then, but remaineth there now, and there shall remain until his second coming. For it is here said, that when he comes from thence he shall descend as he ascended, visibly and apparently to others. Now it is certain, that he did never yet descend so as he then ascended, and therefore must needs be there still, sitting at the right hand of God until his enemies he made his footstool. Other proofs from scripture might be brought for it, but these may suffice to shew that the same body wherein Christ arose from the grave he afterwards ascended up to heaven in, where he sitteth until he descend to earth again at the last day. And truly there was much reason that Christ should thus ascend to heaven after his resurrection from the grave. For Christ having undertaken to be a Mediator betwixt God and man, there was a threefold office he took upon himself, as so many parts of his Mediatorship, a Priestly, Prophetical, and Kingly office; the first respecting God, the other man. As for the two last, his Kingly and Prophetical office, though he did begin them both, he could finish neither of them upon earth. His Prophetical office could not any other way be perfectly performed for us than by pouring forth of his Spirit upon us; it being part of his Prophetical office to make us to understand his Father’s will, as well as to reveal it to us; even not only to explain it to us, but to instruct us in it. Now the only way whereby our understandings are thus enlight¬ ened by him, is by receiving his Spirit from him: which * Vident hoc praesentes apostoli tollentem. Serm. [in ascen. Dom. et paulatim semetipsum ad superna loc. cit.] 166 Of the Resurrection of Christ. Art. Spirit, himself tells us, was not to be given to us until himself was taken from us: For if I go not away , saith he, the Com¬ forter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him to you , John xvi. 7. So that the Person of Christ was first to ascend from us to God, before the Spirit of Christ was to descend from God to us. And therefore had Christ never ascended to heaven, we had never been instructed upon earth: and so Christ could not have been faithful in discharging his Prophetical office for us, unless he had ascended unto God. No, nor his Kingly office; it being the principal part of his Kingly office to triumph over all his conquered enemies, to gather together his scattered friends, to govern them when gathered, to defend them from their enemies, and to apply those privileges to them, which by his own blood he hath purchased for them: all which he could not do till first ascended from them. We have seen the necessity of Christ’s ascension in order to the discharging of his Prophetical and Kingly office; and indeed it was as necessary in regard of his Priestly office too. For the office of the high priest under the law was not only to expiate the sins of the people, but also with the blood of the sin-offering to go into the holy of holies, and there to intercede for them too. And so was Christ (the substance of that shadow) not only to make satisfaction to God’s justice for our sins, but also to make intercession to his mercy for our souls. Which part of his Priestly office was only to be performed within the veil in the holy of holies, even in heaven: whither had not Christ ascended, the apostles could never have said, We have an Advocate with the Father , 1 John ii. 1: it being only in the court of heaven that this our Advocate was to plead our cause, as before he had shed his blood for us. And hence it is, that supposing Christ to be our Media¬ tor, and so our Prophet, Priest, and King, (which no Christ¬ ian but will grant,) we must needs confess, that he who rose from death ascended up to heaven, and that > he hath the y Hie (Jesus) sequester Dei at- que hominum appellatus ex utrius- que partis deposito sibi commisso, earn is quoque depositum servat in semetipso, arrhabonem summae to- tius. Quemadmodum enim nobis arrhabonem Spiritus reliquit, ita et a nobis arrhabonem carnis accepit. IV. Of the Resurrection of Christ. 167 pledge of our flesh there, as we have the pledge of his Spirit here. But now to convince an infidel, Jew or heathen, of this great truth, we must produce our arguments from the miracles which were wrought for the confirmation of it. For as it was by miracles that the gospel was first established by our Saviour in his life, so was it by miracles also that it was pro¬ pagated by his apostles after his death. It was because he had heard of his miracles, that Agbarus z , king of Edessa, sent to Christ for the cure of his sickness. And it was be¬ cause of the miracles that were performed, that so many kings and kingdoms have since believed in him for the pardon of their sins. Miracles, I say, wrought by his apostles after, as well as by Christ himself before his passion: as, that men that understood no more than one or two languages at the most should immediately understand and speak all manner of languages whatsoever, Acts ii. 4—6: that a man lame from his mother's womb should in the name of Christ be raised up to perfect health and strength by them, Acts iii. 2, 6, 7, 8: that all sick folks, and such as were vexed with un¬ clean spirits, should come to them, and be healed by them, Acts v. 16; so that by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders done among the people , ver. 12, which were so convincing to the beholders, that they brought forth the sick into the streets , and laid them on beds and couches , that at the et vexit in ccelum pignus totius sum- mae illuc quoque redigendae. Ter- tull. de resur. carnis, c. 51. [vol. III.] z This Agbarus’s letter to Jesus, as also Jesus’s answer to him, was found in the place appointed for the keeping of public writings, in Edes¬ sa, a city of Arabia; which coming to the view of Eusebius, he hath left them on record for us to read; and that it was the miracles of Christ that made way for the entertainment of the gospel, we may see in this letter to our Saviour. "A yfiapos TOTrdpx^s ’E 8eaarjs T rjaov acoTrjpi dyaOco, &c. Kovarac pm ra nepl crov Kal Tcov aoov lapdrcov, cos dvev (pappaKcov Kcii (ioravdiv vnd aov yivo- pevcov' cos yap \dyos TvcfoXovs ava- /3 Xeneiv 7rouis, ^coXovs Tvepiuardv /cat Xe7 rpovs KaOapl^eis, Kal ciKadapra irvevpara Kal 8alpovas eKpdWeis, /cat rovs iv paKpovoala fiaaavL^opevovs Oepaneveis, Kal veKpovs iyelpeis, Kal ravra navra aKovaas nepl aov, Kara vovv edepijv to erepov tcov 8vo‘ rj otl crv ft 6 Of os /cat KaTafids dno tov ovpavov noLtis Tavra, rj vlos ft tov Of OV 7 TOLOOV TCIVTCI. Ala TOVTO TOLVVV ypapas i8er)dr)V aov aKvXr/vai npos pe, /cat to 7 rddos o f^co Oepairevaat’ /cat yap f/Kovaa otl Kal T ov8aloi KaTa- yoyyv^ovai aov, Kal f^ovXovTai /ca/c&j- aai ae’ ttoXls 8e piKpoTciTT] poi eari, Kal aepvrj, rjTLS i^apKel apcpOTepois. Euseb. hist, eccles. 1 .1. c. 13. [vol. I. p. 80.] 168 Of the Resurrection of Christ. Art. least the shadow of Peter passing by might overshadow some of them , v. 15. So that a none can deny but that there were many miracles wrought for the confirmation of this great fun¬ damental truth, and so for the propagation of the gospel that was built upon it. And truly we cannot but grant that the gospel was propagated by miracles ; for if it had been propa¬ gated without miracles, that would have been the greatest miracle of b all. That it was propagated none can deny, so many, not only persons, but whole kingdoms and countries, believing in it, and adhering to it. And whether it were pro¬ pagated with miracles or without miracles, be sure it was a great miracle that it was ever propagated at all; especially considering, first, it was a c new doctrine, and a new religion never heard of before; yea, a religion contrary to all other religions whatsoever: which being once brought in, all other religions must be thrown out. The Jews must down with their typical priests, their altars, their sacrifices, and their ceremonies; down with their sabbaths, and new moons, and' passover. The Gentiles must cease worshipping the sun, moon, and stars, believing all their former gods to be no gods, but idols; and that one Christ that was crucified at Hierusa- lem was the only true God. Secondly, it was a strange doc¬ trine, beyond the reach of human reason to comprehend, or indeed to conceive: as, that in the Trinity there should be three Persons, and yet but one nature ; in Christ two natures, and yet but one Person. That a virgin should bring forth a son, and yet remain a virgin still: that he that made the virgin should be made of her: and he become a man in time, a Nam facta esse multa miracula quae attestarentur illi uni grandi salubrique miraculo, quo Christus in caelum cum carne in qua resur- rexit, ascendit, negare non possu- mus. Aug. de civit. Dei, 1 . 22. c. 8. [1. vol. VII. p. 663.] b Si ergo per apostolos Christ! ut eis crederetur resurrectionem atque ascensionem praedicantibus Christi, etiam ista miracula facta esse non credant; hoc nobis unum grande miraculum sufficit, quod ea terrarum orbis sine ullis miraculis credidit. Ibid. c. 5. [p. 660.] c A vto p.ev ovv pdXicrTa to Bavpa- crrov fJiOL Xeyeis, otl biiiky) 77 kcuvoto- / ua , kcu to tovs ovTas KaBaipelv, Kai tov ecTTavpccpevov avayyeXXeiv’ noBev yap avTo'is enrjXBe Toiavra icrjpvTTeiv; noBev vnep tov tIXovs avTcov Bappew; TLvas Toov ivpb avTwv toiovtov tl Ka- TcopdoxoTas d)(ov tdelv; ov navTes dalp-ovas 7 TpoaeKvvovv ; ov ttcivtcs ra a-TOL^ela iOeoTToiovv; ov 8ia(fropos r) v ttjs dcrefteias 6 rponos; dXX opu>s ra ndvTa inrjXOov, koX KaTeXvcrav Tavra, Kal iirdbpapov ev [Spa^cl Kaipw rrjv oLKovplvrjv anao-av. Chrys. in 1 Cor. hom, 4. [vol. III. p. 265. 20.] IV. Of the Resurrection of Christ. 1.69 who had been God from eternity. That this Christ should come into the world to save it, and yet was himself condemned by it, and that his being condemned by it was the way where¬ by to save it. That he that finds his life shall lose it , and he that loseth his life shall find it , even such a life wherein he expects to labour continually, and yet hopes to rest unto all eternity. Nay, thirdly, it was not only a doctrine above reason, but contrary to flesh and blood; a doctrine that none can truly embrace, but he must forsake all his former sins, and commence holy. The covetous must become liberal; the drunkard sober; the glutton temperate ; the impatient thank¬ ful ; the rebellious obedient; the malicious loving, not only to his friends, but his very enemies: this, this is the religion that was propagated. And by whom was it propagated? Even by a company of silly fishermen, d who had neither authority to command, eloquence to persuade, nor power to constrain any one into the embracement and profession of it. So that whether we will or no, the premises considered, we must be forced to conclude that there was something more than ordinary in the business ; even that Christ, which they had so much success in the preaching of, was faithful to the promise he had made them, when amongst them, to be with them unto the end of the world; though not in his Person, yet by his Spirit, which being ascended up to his Father in heaven, he sent down to his apostles upon earth, to furnish them with all graces whatsoever requisite for that work they were to be engaged in; and not only thus to enable them to preach the gospel to the world, but also to prepare the world to receive the gospel from them. All which none certainly can think the apostles could do on earth, had they not had continual supplies of grace from Christ in heaven. Which things are e a clear argument, both that Christ is risen and d Ineruditos liberalibus discipli- nis, et omnino quantum ad istorum doctrinas attinet impolitos, non peri- tos grammatica, non armatos dia- lectica, non rhetorica inflatos, pisca- tores Christus cum retibus fidei ad mare hujus seculi paucissimos misit, atque ita ex omni genere tarn multos pisces, et tanto mirabiliores quanto rariores ipsos philosophos cepit. Aug. de civitate Dei, 1 . 22. c. 5. Yid. et Chrys. in 1 Cor. hom. 4. e Meyiarij yap ovtcos dvaaraaecos anodei^Ls, kcu to v crcfrayevra Xpcarov TocravTTjv pera Oavarov eTn 8 eii;ao- 6 aL dvvapiv, cos tovs £0 ovras dvOpconovs 170 Of the Resurrection of Christ. Art. ascended into heaven, and that he there sitteth, governing, protecting, and prospering his church on earth still, as he f enabled his apostles to propagate it at first. And indeed this is so necessary a truth to be believed, that none can be a Christian and not believe it: and therefore is there scarce any of the Fathers but make mention of it, and give their assent unto it. Let these few speak for all the rest. First, Justin Martyr, who speaks fully both to his ascending into heaven at the first, and his sitting there still. But that God the Father of all was to bring Christ after his resurrection from the dead to heaven, and to detain him there until he had destroyed the devils that were enemies against him, and that the number of the good and virtuous people that were foreknown to him was accomplished, for whose sakes also he hath not yet finished his decree, (for the consummation of all things,) hear the words of the prophet David, which are on this wise ; The Lord said unto my Lord , Sit thou at my right hand , until I make thine enemies thy foot¬ stool T And before him Ignatius said h , “ That Christ rose the third day, the Father raising him up, and conversed with his disciples forty days, and afterwards was taken up to his Father, and sitteth at his right hand, expecting till his enemies be put under his feet.” And St. Augustine excel¬ lently to the purpose 1 ; “ For as to his majesty, as to his 7rel(TCU, Kal 7TaTpl8os, Kal oIklcis, Kal tos r/v tci Karop- 6copara. Chrysost. hom. in Ignat, [vol. V. p. 503. 29.] f Et^oy yap tovtcov cnravrcov pel- £ova avppafav rrjv tov aravpcodev- tos Kal avacrravTos 8vvapiv. Id. in 1 Cor. hom. 4 . [29. loc. cit.] S r, 0 ti 8e ayayelv tov Xpiarov els tov ovpavov 6 7raTrjp tcov 7 ravTcev Qeos pera to avapr)- crcopev) ovKer av etKonos, cos aXXo- rplas vnapx°v (fivaecas. Basil, adv. Eunom. 1 . 3. [vol. I. p. 75 1 -] 174 Of the Holy Ghost. Art. Saviour himself, Go ye therefore and teach all nations , baptizing them in the name of the Father , S-on, and Holy Ghost , Matt, xxviii. 19- And of these three, the two first in order being considered in the four preceding articles, the third is set down in this : of whom it is here said, that he, proceeding from the Father and the Son , is of one substance and glory with the Father and the Son. The Holy Ghost proceeding from the Father and the Son: which last words, ( and the Son,) as they were inserted into the Constantinopolitan Creed by our ancestors in these West¬ ern churches, (which b was the occasion of the vast schism betwixt them and the Eastern,) so are they here inserted into the articles of our faith, both to shew the constancy of our church in so great a truth, and to keep her children still constant and faithful to it. And though this the Spirit’s procession from the Son be not expressly delivered in the scriptures as the procession from the Father is, John xv. 26, yet is the substance and purport of it virtually contained in the scriptures, and may clearly be deduced from them ; for as he is called the Spirit of the Father , Matt. x. 20, so is he b The first general council assem¬ bled at Nice, an. Dom. 325, having composed an excellent creed, or rule of faith, (which in the eighth Article, God willing, we shall treat of,) and having said no more in it concerning the Holy Ghost, than kcli els to nvev- pa to ayiov, and (we believe) in the Holy Ghost, there being another ge¬ neral council about fifty years after, held at Constantinople, they thought good, for the better suppressing of the heresy of Macedonius, who de¬ nied the Divinity of the Holy Ghost, to confirm the same creed, with this addition amongst others to it, /cat eis to nvevpa to ayiov, to nvpiov, to £coo- 7roiov, to e< tov narpos eienopevopevov . Which creed, with this addition, the next general council at Ephesus, an. Dom. 431, not only continued, but also denounced an anathema against all such as should make any more additions to it. Yet notwithstanding the controversy being started in the Western churches. Whether the Spirit proceed from the Son or no, as well as from the Father, the eighth council at Toledo in Spain, an. Dom. 653, debating the question, and carrying it in the affirmative, they, after those words in the Con¬ stantinopolitan Creed, it c tov II arpos, put in Kai vlov, and so made it run in Latin, Credimus et in Spiritum Sanctum, dominum, vivificatorem, ex Patre Filioque procedentem; and not only so, but they caused this Creed, so enlarged and altered by them, to be put into their public liturgies, and so sung continually in their churches, the French joining with them, and afterwards the En¬ glish too, as we may see in our public Liturgy. But in the council held at Akens, in Germany, the matter was after debate referred to pope Leo the Third, but he was so far from allowing of that addition, that he desired it might by degrees be quite left out of the Creed. For the legates being come from the V. Of the Holy Ghost. 175 called the Spirit of the Son, Gal. iv. 6, and the Spirit of Christ, Rom. viii. 9. 1 Pet. i. 11, and the Spirit of Jesus Christ, Phil, i. 19. Now why is he called the Spirit of the Father, but because he proceedeth from the Father? And how therefore could he be called the Spirit of the Son, unless he proceeded from the Son also ? Hence also it is that as the Father is said to send the Spirit, John xiv. 26, so is the Son also said to send the Spirit, chap. xv. 26. xvi. 7. The Father is said to send the Spirit, because the Spirit proceeds from the Father; for the right of the Father’s mission of the Spirit is grounded upon his communication of his essence to him. And by consequence, the Father sending the Spirit, therefore because the Spirit proceeds from the Father, the Spirit must needs proceed from the Son also, because the Son also is said to send the Spirit; for if the Son also did not communicate his essence to him, and so he proceed from the Son, the Son would have no relation at all to him, much less any right of mission over him. council to him, we find in the Acts of the said council one of them say¬ ing to him. Ergo ut video illud a vestra paternitate decernitur, ut pri- mo illud, de quo qusestio agitur, de saepe fato symbolo tollatur : et tunc demum a quolibet licite et libere, sive cantando, sive tradendo, dis- catur et doceatur: to whom Leo answers, Ita proculdubio a nostra parte decernitur; ita quoque ut a vestra assentiatur, a nobis omnibus modis suadetur. [vol. IV. p. 973.] And that a true copy of the said Creed, without any such addition to it, might be recorded and perpetu¬ ated, he caused it to be graven in Greek and Latin upon silver plates, and placed in the church for every one to read. So Lombard: Leo tertius (symboli illius) transcriptum in tabula argentea post altare beati Pauli posita posteris reliquit, pro amore, ut ipse ait, et cautela fidei orthodoxae. In quo quidem sym¬ bolo in processione Spiritus Sancti solus commemoratur Pater his ver¬ bis, et in Spiritum Sanctum Domi- num vivificatorem, ex Patre proceden- tem. Sent. 1 . i.dist. 11. [p. 27.] But afterwards these tables were neglect¬ ed, and pope Nicholas the First caused this clause, Filioque, to be added again to the Creed, and so to be read in all the churches under his power. But Photius, patriarch of Constantinople, condemned him for it: and in the council of Con¬ stantinople, an. Dom. 879. it was declared that the addition should be quite taken away again; and after that Cerularius, Theophylact, and the Grecians generally, inveighed against it. For which the popes of Rome branded them, and so all the Greek churches, with heresy. And so the quarrel betwixt the Greek and Latin, or Eastern and Western churches, began and hath been con¬ tinued : the Eastern churches con¬ demning the Western for inserting the clause Filioque into the Creed of a general council without the con¬ sent of the like authority; the Western churches, on the other hand, condemning the Eastern for keeping it out. 176 Of the Holy Ghost. Art. And indeed I cannot see in reason as well as scripture how the Spirit can be denied to proceed from the Son as well as from the Father. For the Father in begetting of the Son communicated his whole essence and nature to him, so that whatsoever the Father is or hath, as God, that hath the Son also : only with this personal distinction, that the Father hath all things not only in himself, but of himself also, where¬ as the Son hath all things though in himself, yet not of himself, but only by communication from the Father. Now the Son receiving from the Father whatsoever the Father is in himself, and being every way the same God with the Father, he must needs issue forth the Spirit from himself, as well as the Father doth from himself. For the Spirit doth not proceed from the Father as he is a Father, (for then he would be a Son too as well as the Word,) but only as he is God. And therefore the Son being God as well as the Father, (though not a father,) the Spirit must needs proceed from him as well as from the Father : only with this dis¬ tinction, that the Father hath the Spirit proceeding from him of himself, but the Son hath the Spirit proceeding from him of the c Father, who communicating his own individual es¬ sence, and so whatsoever he is, (his paternal relation to him excepted,) to the Son, could not but communicate this to him also, even to have the Spirit proceeding from him, as he hath it proceeding from himself. So that as whatsoever else the Fa¬ ther hath originally in himself, the Son hath also by commu¬ nication from the Father, so hath the Son likewise this, the Spirit’s proceeding from him, by communication from the Father, as the Father hath the Spirit proceeding from him originally in himself. Neither is our church singular in this assertion, that the Spirit proceeds from the Son as well as from the Father ; for the ancient Fathers of the church of Christ did generally c Si enim quicquid habet, de de Filio Spiritus Sanctus procedere Patre habet Filius; de Patre utique reperitur. Sed hoc quoque illi Pater habet ut de illo procederet Spiritus dedit, non jam existenti et nondum Sanctus. Aug. de Trin. 1 . 15. c. 26. habenti, sed quicquid unigenito Ver- [47. vol. VIII. p. 1000.] Nec de bo dedit, gignendo dedit. Sic ergo quo genitum est Verbum, nec de eum genuit, ut etiam de illo donum quo procedit principaliter Spiritus commune procederet, et Spiritus Sanctus, nisi Deus Pater. Ideo Sanctus Spiritus esset amborum, autem addidi principaliter, quia et Ibid. c. 17. [29. p. 988.] V. Of the Holy Ghost. 177 teach the same: the Latin d Fathers expressly avouching it, that the Spirit did in plain terms proceed both from the Father and Son. And the e Greek Fathers, though they do d Spiritus autem Sanctus vere Spiritus est procedens quidem a Patre et Filio, sed non est ipse Filius, quia non generator, neque Pater quia procedit ab utroque. Ambros. de symb. c. 3. [vol. II. App.p. 322.] Filius autem de Patre natus est, et Spiritus Sanctus de Patre principaliter, et ipso sine ullo temporis intervallo dante, commu- niter de utroque procedit. Aug. de Trinit. 1 . 15. c. 26. [47.] Spiritus autem Sanctus non de Patre proce¬ dit ad Filium, et de Filio procedit ad sanctificandam creaturam, sed simul de utroque procedit: quamvis hoc Pater Filio dederit, ut quemad- modum de se ita de illo quoque procedat. Ibid. c. 27. [48.] Et in servos ccelestia dona profudit, Spiritum ab unigena Sanctum et Patre procedentem. Paulin, in nat. 9. S. Felic. [Bibl. Max. Patr. vol. VI. p. 287.] Cum enim constat quia Paracletus Spiritus a Patre semper procedit et Filio, cur se Filius recessurum dicit ut ille veniat qui a Filio nunquam recedit ? Gre¬ gor. Dialog. 1. 2. c. 38. [vol. II. p. 276.] Patrem quoque confiteri inge- nitum, Filium genitum, Spiritum autem Sanctum nec genitum nec ingenitum, sed ex Patre Filioque procedentem. Isidor. Hispal.Eccles. offic. 1 . 2. c. [23. vol. I. p. 611.] Audi manifestius, proprium Patris esse genuisse, et proprium Filii natum fuisse, proprium vero Spiritus Sancti procedere, de Patre Filioque. Vigil, contra Eut. 1 . 1. [Bibl. Max. Patr. vol. VIII. p. 724.] Proprium est Spiritus Sancti quod nec ingenitus, nec genitus est, sed a Patre et Filio aequaliter proeedens. Alcuin. de Deo. [p. 761.] Nec alius est qui genuit, alius qui genitus est, alius qui de utroque processit. Leo Epist. [XV. vol. I. p. 450.] Neque Spiri¬ tum S. accipimus ut aut Pater sit aut Filius, sed ingenitum Patrem, et de Patre genitum Filium, et de Patre et Filio procedentem Spiritum Sanc¬ tum, unius credimus esse substantiae et essentiae. Eugen. de cathol. fid. [Bibl. Max. Patr. vol. VIII. p. 683.] Qui noster Don.inus, qui tuus unicus Spirat de patrio corde Paracletum. Prudent. Hymn. 5. [Cathemer. 159. vol. I. p. 41.] De Spiritu autem S. nec tacere oportet nec loqui necesse est; sed sileri a nobis, eorum causa qui nesciunt, non potest. Loqui autem de eo non necesse est, quia de Patre et Filio autoribus confitendus est. Hilar, de Trin. 1. 2. [29. p. 802.] Spiritum cum Deo Patre et Filio esse credo, Deum unius substantiae, unius quoque naturae, nec tamen genitum vel creatum, sed a Patre Filioque procedentem amborum esse Spiritum. Pelegrin. in symb. [vol. XVII. p. 456. Bibl. Max. Patr.] Spiritum vero sanctum nec creatum, nec genitum, sed procedentem ex Patre et Filio profitemur. Concil. Tolet. IV. c. 1. [vol. III. p.579.] Spiritum quoque Sanctum, qui est tertia in Trinitate persona, unum et aequalem cum Deo Patre et Filio cre¬ dimus esse Deum, unius substantiae unius quoque naturae : non tamen genitum vel creatum, sed ab utris- que procedentem, amborum esse spiritum. Concil. Tolet. XI. Expos, fid. [Ibid. p. T020.] Et quos sus- ceperunt suscipimus, glorificantes Deum Patrem, sine initio, et Filium ejus unigenitum ex Patre generatum ante secula, et Spiritum Sanctum procedentem ex Patre et Filio inenar- rabiliter sicut preedicaverunt hi quos memoravimus supradicti sancti apo- stoli et prophetae et doctores. Synod. Anglic, apud Bed. Hist. Eccles. 1 . 4. e. 1 7. [p* 161.] V. et Acta concil. Forojul. an. 791. [vol. IV. p.847.] Fideli ac devota professione fatemur quod Spiritus Sanctus eternaliter ex Patre et Filio, non tanquam ex duo- bus principiis sed tanquam ex uno, non duabus spirationibus, sed una spi- ratione procedit. Concil. Lugdun. II. [gen.] in decretal, [vol. VII. p. 705.] e I confess in the creed attributed N beveridge. 178 Art. Of the Holy Ghost. not expressly deliver that lie proceeds from the Son, (because the scriptures do not expressly assert it,) yet they say that he f receiveth from the Son, that he is Stlie Spirit of the Son, h the Word of the Son, yea, ’ God of the Son; plainly implying that what he hath is communicated from the Son as well as from the Father, which is the same thing that to Athanasius, it is expressly said in the Latin, (for in the Greek there is no such thing,) Spiritus Sanctus a Patre et Filio non factus nec creatus nec genitus est sed procedens. But we cannot deduce any certain argu¬ ment from thence, that Athanasius was of that opinion, because it is doubted by some whether he was the author of that creed or no; or if he was, it is probable that clause might be inserted by others into this, as it was into the Constantinopolitan creed. And that he was not of that judgment, we may perceive from his never mentioning it in any other place, though he disputes so often about the Deity, and procession of the Spirit. Especially it is probable he would have mentioned it (if he had held it) in the rule of his faith which he delivered in the council of Nice, or, be sure, in some place or other of his writings; but though he speaks often of the procession of the Spirit from the Father, he never mentions any procession from the Son. But of this more hereafter. f To ayiov nvevpa, 7 rvevpa ayiov, 7 rvevpa Qeov del crvv Uarpl Kal Y t<5, ovk aXXoTpiov Qeov, dno be Qeov ov, ano Uarpos eKnopevopevov, kcu tov Ylov Xapfiavov. Epiphan. in Ancor. C. 6. [vol. II. p. II.] * Ov yap Tponov ovbels eyvco tov 7 rarepa el pi) 6 vibs, ovbe tov vibv el prj 6 narijp, ovtco ToXpd> Xeyeiv on ovbe to nvevpa el pi] 6 Uarijp, kcu 6 Ytoy, nap ov e Ilarpt Kai tw Yaw ravra kolpo. r evpa to ayiov TOcravTa (pKovoprjcrep, eocrre avTas (jivXa^Otjpai. Kat opdre dpcodep ipa padrjTe tov Qeov ti)p a(pa- tov (pikavBpcoTTLCiv. eVeVi'evcre TO) pa~ Kapico Mcoucrei, tcis 7rXaKas e/coXaif/e. Kareo-^ep avrop TecraapaKOPra rjpepas 67TI TOV opovs, KCU TTClXiP TOO’CIVTCLS CTepaS (bcm 80VPCII TOP POpOP' pCTCl fie ravra ivpo^Tas enep^e pvpia 7ra- Goptcis 8npd’ inr/XOc noXepos, dvelXop ndpras, KaTeKoy^ap, epeTrprjadrjcrap al (3l(3\oC erepa> TrdXip dp8p'i OavpaaTW tpenvevcrep, coore avTas eicdecrdcu tco *Ecrfipa Xeyco, kcu ano Xeiyj/dpoyp c tvp- TeSrjpai enoiTjcre. Chrysost. in epist. ad Heb. horn. 8. [vol. IV. p. 478. 22.] d This the Jews themselves ac¬ knowledge, van' tit« n an n n is Vana nans nvoon '‘nn ion is man n:a) is pin in a'a? ''i>ri mni> sin xnpnn »*idd mini n'D miotj, i. e. Post opus illud quod Masoretha? praestiterunt, impossibile est quod incident aut incidere possit ulla varietas aut mu- tatio in posterum in ullis libris scrip- turae : nec frustra dixerunt rabbini nostri memoriae benedictae Masora est sepes legis. Elias Lev. orat. 3. lib. Hammasoreth. [p. n.] And so Ab. Ezra, mi>nai> naa? a?’ n nosn mmn noian tuna? nmnon '’nn mm min man cmam n vrn Dnnnn “n anpn nani nnioi nee in, i. e. Certe enim est merces operibus autorum Masoreth, qui sunt ut custodes murorum civi- tatis : propter eos enim permanet lex Domini et libri sancti in sua for¬ ma absque ulla additione vel detrac¬ tion. Ab. Ezr. in 1 . sna> hd\ [c. 1. init.] 192 Of the Sufficiency of the Art. and therefore all traditions of men which are contrary to this word of God are necessarily to be abhorred, and all traditions of men not recorded in this word of God are not necessarily to be believed. What is here written we are bound to believe because it is written ; and what is not here written we are not bound to believe because it is not written. I say we are not bound to believe it, but I cannot say we are bound not to believe it; for there be many truths which we may believe, nay, are bound to believe, because truth, which notwithstand¬ ing are not recorded in the word of God. But though there be many things we may believe, yet is there nothing we need believe in order to our everlasting happiness which is not here written ; so that if we believe all that is here spoken, and do all that is here commanded, we shall certainly be saved, though we do not believe what is not here spoken, nor do what is not here commanded. And indeed the scripture itself is its own witness in this case : which if it was not, all the arguments in the world could never make this article to be a truth; for that the scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation is a truth, the belief of which is itself necessary to salvation ; and there¬ fore should the scripture contain all other necessary truths, and not contain this one necessary truth, even that it doth contain all necessary truths, it would not contain all things necessary to salvation. But what truth more frequently inculcated and more expressly contained in scripture than this ? What words can express any thing more fully than those of St. Paul doth this, when he saith, All scripture is given by inspiration of God^ and is profitable for d doctrine, for reproof for correction , for instruction in righteousness : that the man of God may be perfect , throughly furnished unto all good works , 2 Tim. iii. 16, 17? Here we see the scriptures are d Ylpos didacrKaXlav' e’lri padelv c’ltl ayvopcrai XPV’ ^KeWev clcropeOa’ el eXey^ai ra yj/ev8rj kol tovto eKel- 6ev' el eTravopOcoBrjvai, kol (raxppovi- aBrjvai’ 7 rpos 7rapaK\rjcriv, 7 rpos na- papvdiav, (f>r]cr\, 7 rpos enavopBcocnv' TOVT ecrnv ei TL Xelnei KOI XP T ) TTpOCT- reBrjvai' Tva dprios ?/ 6 rov Qeov av- BpcoTros. Chrys. in 2 Tim. hom. 9. [vol. IV. p. 370. 26.] The Ethi- opic translation for 7 rpos 8ida.crK.a- Xlav hath nmv: bacuil tymyhrt, in all doctrine, it is not only profitable for some doctrine, but for all that is necessary to be known. VI. Holy Scripture* for Salvation. 193 sufficient to make a man, yea a man of Clod, a minister, 1 Tim. vi. 11, one whose duty it is to declare all the counsel of God, Acts xx. &7; yet the scriptures are sufficient to make such a man perfect, furnishing him with whatsoever he need acquaint his people with, or his people need to be confirmed in. And in the foregoing verse he tells Timothy, the scriptures are able to make him wise to salvation , 2 Tim. iii. 15. But how can that be, unless they contain all things necessary to salvation ? What is it to be wise unto salvation, but to know whatsoever is necessary to be known in order to salvation ? If the scrip¬ tures do not therefore contain all things necessary to be known, how can they make us wise unto salvation \ To this purpose also make those places that forbid any addition to or detraction from the word of God; as, You shall not add unto the word that 1 command you, neither shall you diminish aught from it, Deut. iv. 2; and, Whatsoever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it , Deut. xii. 8%. And that this may not be thought to have reference to the Pentateuch or Old Testa¬ ment only, we have it again repeated in the New, with a curse annexed to it: For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues which are written in this book: and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy , God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book, Rev. xxii. 18,19. In this book , that is, this book of the Revelations in particular, or the e whole book of the holy scriptures in general, of which this is e Johannes apostolus sub unius libri appellatione de tota utriusque testamenti serie cofltestatus est, di- cens, Si quis, inquit, apposuerit ad hose, apponet Deus omnes plagas scriptas in libro hoc. Paulinus in concilio Forojuliens. [vol. IV.p.854.] A lapaprvperai vpdv rois aaovoven prj T€ npoaSelval tl pijT dtyeXe'iv, dXXd ra ypatyiKa Ibidapara, tcov 'Attlkcov avv- rd^eoov, Kcii ra>v biaXeKTticcov crvXXo- yicrpa>v ^yeicrdai d^coirurTOTepa, to tv\ov 7rapaKivrj(ra>a-cv, dvaOepa etTTaxrav . [Ibid.] O 2 196 Of the Sufficiency of the Art. must be a necessary article of my faith which is ail article of any man’s faith; and so, unless I believe what every one be¬ lieves, I can never be saved. But what reason have I to believe one man more than another ? Are they not all men ? No; the pope is more than a man, acted with an infallible spirit; and therefore in believing him I do not believe a mere man, but God himself speaking by him. But what ground can I have to believe this ? Is it written in the scriptures that the pope is infallible? No, but that all men are liars. And so that the pope is infallible I have no certain ground to believe it, and therefore no certain ground to believe any thing he saith to be true. But again, I would here ask any gainsayer, for what end were the scriptures written ? Were they not therefore written , that we might believe that Jesus is the Christ , the Son of God; and that believing we might have life through his name ? John xx. 31. Were they not written that we might know the things that belong to our everlasting peace before they be hid from our eyes ? Were they not written that in them we might have life eternal ? John v. 39. Yea, were they not written on pur¬ pose that we might have surer footing for our faith than mere tradition ? But how can the scripture attain these ends, unless it be perfect and sufficient of itself to shew us our way to heaven, and to acquaint us with all necessary truths with¬ out the help of human traditions ? If tradition would have served the turn still to ground our faith upon, as it was in the beginning of the world, certainly the scriptures were writ¬ ten in vain, and to no purpose. So that if it doth not contain all things, what need was there of its containing any thing that is necessary to salvation? For all the articles of our faith might as well have been delivered to us by tradition as some of them. But such as say there is any thing that is neither contained in the scriptures, nor may be proved by them, which notwith¬ standing is requisite and necessary to salvation, let them tell me what these things are; or how came they first into the catalogue of the articles of the Christian faith. Is there any nation in the world that hath not some traditions peculiar to itself? Yea, and are there not many traditions that cross VI. Holy Scriptures for Salvation. 197 and contradict each other? Now which of all these am I bound to believe in order to my salvation ? Or who shall be the judge betwixt traditions that dissent from one another? I speak not of such traditions (neither doth this article intend them) that concern only rites and ceremonies left to the dis¬ position of the church, which, not being of divine but only positive and human right, may and do alter in every nation, and are acknowledged by none to be either necessary articles of our faith, or essential parts of God's worship ; but of such traditions as are required of us as articles of faith, without which we can never be saved; for even these do often oppose and thwart each other, yea, and themselves too. There is scarce an age but makes some alteration in every one of the popish traditions, as about the infallibility of the pope, purga¬ tory, and the like, there are new notions continually coining about them; ail of which certainly cannot be necessary to salvation, because many of them are contrary to one another. Or which of them is or is not to be believed, how must it be determined but by the scriptures ? Surely such as are con¬ trary to the scriptures are therefore to be rejected, because contrary to the scriptures; such as agree with the scriptures are therefore to be believed, because they agree with the scriptures. And if there be any such that are neither con¬ trary to the scriptures, nor can be proved by them, such cer¬ tainly it is not necessary to reject or believe: it is not neces¬ sary we should reject them, because no way contrary to the scriptures; nor is it necessary to believe them as articles of our faith, because not contained in the scriptures. And so, though there be many things we may believe, yet there is nothing we must believe or not be saved, unless it be expressly asserted in the scriptures, or may be clearly deduced from them. Neither is our church singular in this assertion, but we have all or most of the Fathers 1 hands for it. Let these few witness for the rest. First, Hippolytus s the martyr, who 8 Unus Deus est quem non ali- seculi exercere, non aliter hoc con- unde, fratres, agnoscimus quam ex sequi poterit, nisi dogmata philo- sanctis scripturis. Quemadmodum sophorum legat. Sic quicunque enim si quis vellet sapientiam hujus volumus pietatem in Deum exer- 198 Of the Sufficiency of the Art. tells us 44 there is one God, whom we do not otherwise acknowledge (brethren) but out of the holy scriptures. For as he that would profess the wisdom of this world cannot otherwise attain to it than by reading the opinions of the philosophers ; so whosoever of us would exercise piety towards God, we cannot otherwise learn it than out of the holy scrip¬ tures.” And h Clemens Alexandrinus plainly; 44 Let us not simply attend to the words of men, which it is as lawful for us also to gainsay: but if it be not enough only to say what we think, but what is said ought to be believed, let us not look for testimony from men, but let us confirm what is questioned by the word of God, which is the certainest of all demonstrations, nay, is itself the only demonstration.” And Tertullian 1 ; 44 But whether all things were made of any subject matter, I never yet read. Let Hermogenes''s shop show where it is written. If it be not written, let him fear that woe that is appointed to those that put any thing to or take any thing from the word of God.” Cyril of Hierusalem speaks much so to the purpose k : 44 For there ought nothing at all to be delivered concerning the divine and holy mysteries of faith without the holy scrip¬ tures, nor ought we to be moved at all with probabilities and prepared orations or compositions of speech. Neither do thou believe me that say these things, unless thou takest the demonstrations of the things which are said out of the holy scriptures.” And Athanasius tells us 1 , 44 The holy and divinely cere, non aliunde discemus quam ex scripturis divinis. Hippol. hom. contra Noet. [Bibl. Max. patr. vol. III. p. 263.] 11 O v yap anXcos a7rov 7 rapadl8oadai ypa(f)d>v‘ prjde cnrXws 7ri6av6Trjai Ka\ Xoycou KaTaaKevaxs 7rapa(j)epeadai’ prjde epo\ tS TavTa XeyovTL anXcds triaTevayps, edvTtjv dirobeif-iv tcov KaTayyeXXoptvcov dno ToovOeicov prj Xa(3rjs ypaejxcdv. Cyril. Hieros. Catech, 4. [12. p. 56.] 1 A VTapKeis pev yap ela\v ai dytai Ka\ deonvevaTOi ypa(f)a\ npds ttjv Ttjs d\r]9eias dnayyeXlav. Athan. Orat. contra gentes. [init. vol. I.] VI. Holy Scriptures for Salvation. 199 inspired scriptures are of themselves sufficient for the discovery of the truth.” And St. Augustine m , that “ when our Lord Christ had done many things, all of them were not written, as the same holy evangelist testifies, that the Lord Christ had said and done many things that were not written; but those things were chosen out that they might be written, which seemed sufficient for the salvation of believers.” And therefore n St. Basil saith, “ That every word and action ought to be confirmed by the testimony of the divinely inspired scriptures, to the full confirmation of the good, and confusion of the evil.” And that “it is an ° evident falling from the faith, and an argument of pride, either to take away any thing from those things that are written, or to introduce any thing of those things which are not written.” And OrigenP ; “ But if there remaineth any thing which the holy scriptures doth not determine, no other third scripture ought to be received for the confirmation of knowledge.” And this is the touchstone that St. Cyprian examines tra¬ ditions by: From whence,” saith he, “ is that tradition? Does it descend from divine and evangelical authority? or doth it come from the commands of the apostles, or their epistles ? For that those things ought to be done which are written, God himself testifies and propounds, saying to Jesus Nave or Joshua, Let not the booh of this law depart from thy mouth , but thou slialt meditate in it night and day , and thou shalt observe all the things that are written in them to do them. m Cum multa fecisset dominus Jesus non omnia scripta sunt, sicut idem ipse sanctus evangelista testa- tur : multa dominum Christum et dixisse et fecisse quae scripta non sunt. Electa sunt autem quae scribe- rentur quae saluti credentium suffi- cere videbantur. Aug. in Joh. Tract. 49. [1. vol. III. par. ii.] n Otl 8 ei nav pqpa KaL n'pay pa TTicrTOvcrOcu rfj papropla rrjs Oeonvev- Kal yivd.tcrK.op.ev, Kal opoXo- yovpev, ovdev nepaLrepco tovtoov eVri- £r)TovvT€S. dbvvarov yap Tvapa ra Sfuodcos vno tow Oeicov Xoyioov rr/s re TraXaids Ka\ Kaiv-qs 8iadr] Kr ]S r\U lv elprjpeva elnciv n 7 rep'i Qeov rj oXoos evvorjaai. Cyril, de Trin. et pers. Christi. [vol. VI. init.] x E vayyiXiKai yap (3 l(3Xol tu>v ^r/Tovfxfvcov Ttfv \v(tiv. Ibid, gathered together the books of the 202 Of the Sufficiency of the Art. phets and holy men, being met in the great council, (of which in the foregoing part of this article,) after they had gathered together the several books that were written by the inspiration of God, seeing the spirit of prophecy was now to cease, and so no more books after to be added to the canon of the scrip¬ tures; they determined the number of them, dividing them into three general parts, Moses, the Prophets, and the Hagio- grapha or Holy Writings, which division our Saviour himself doth afterwards take notice of, saying to his disciples, That all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses , and in the Prophets , and in the Psalms , Luke xxiv. 44, where the Psalms , being part of the holy writings, are put for them all. These three general parts were afterwards sub¬ divided into several books. The Law of Moses into five books: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. The Prophets b , as we find in the Talmud, were divided into Old Testament after the captivity had scattered them abroad, the Fathers frequently inculcate : Quem- admodum et Hierosolymis Baby- lonica expugnatione deletis omne instrumentum Judaicse lileraturee per Esdram constat restauratum. Tertul. de habit, mul. [vol. III. c. iii.] Et post deinde temporibus Ar- taxerxis Persarum regis, inspiravit Hesdrse sacerdoti tribus Levi, pro- phetarum omnes rememorare ser- mones etrestituere populo earn legem quae data esset per Moysem. Iren, adv. haeres. 1 . 3. c. [21. 2.] Mera he ravra irpocp-qras errepyjse pvpia 7 raduuTas heivd. enr/Xde 7 roXepos, avei- \ov Travras, KareKO^av, eve 7 rprjadqcrav ai (3i(3\oi. erepco nd\iv dvhpl davpaarw evenvevcrev, coo-re avrcis eicOecrdaL, tco "E ahpa Xeyco, Kcii dno \ei\frdvcov crvv- TeOrjvcu enoirjo-e. Chrysost. in epist. ad Heb. hom. 8. [vol. IV. p. 478. 26.] Quo tempore Esdras Dei sacerdos combustam a Chaldaeis in archivis templi restituit legem; nempe qui eodem spiritu qui in scriptura fuerat plenus fuit. Aug. [vol. III. par. ii. App.] de mirabil. S. Script, h 2. c. 33. a So Elias Levita, "mn vn ab ’2 vcai'i orun Dm in' amino nnco C'imm D’N'23 mm cpbn "3 crm, i. e. For all the four and twenty books were not bound together, but they (viz. Ezra and the men of the great synagogue) bound them toge¬ ther, and made of them three parts, the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagiographa. Elias Levita, Prsef. ad 1 . Masoreth. [p. tq 1 ]. This division is frequently to be met withal also in the Talmud, as mm msob m’lrr : -m*o tzopma nm'in i. e. They brought before us the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagio¬ grapha, bound up together. Bava Bathra. [c. 1.] f. 13. 2. And in the Targum too, pTrcs-i pmsn u’nDi nxiii 'mnsi p-iDD, i. e. And he exercised himself in the twenty-four books of the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagiographa. Cant. V. 10. edit. Ven. [1547.] b For thus we find in Bava Bathra, orn'in b 1 © piD pm fi'oi' D'Dboi b«m\o D'tDDvtoi runrp *v©y rpy©' b«pmn, i. e. our Rabbins have taught us thatthe order of the Prophets is, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Jeremiah, Ezecliiel, Isaiah, and the twelve lesser Prophets. But c’bnn "idd rvn D'2in3 bw pno O’viun I'® nbnp 'b \do ivn n'Q'n mm iriDN nb’ao b«'m, i. e. The orders of the Hagiographa, VI. 203 Holy Scriptures for Salvation. eight parts: Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Jeremiah, Ezechiel, Isaiah, and the twelve lesser Prophets, which all made up but one part. The Holy Writings they divided into eleven parts: Ruth, the Book of Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Lamentations, Daniel, Hester, Ezra, and Chronicles. And so in all they reckoned four and twenty books. But afterwards Ruth being added to Judges and the Lamentations of Jeremiah to the Prophecy of Jeremiah their writer, the number was brought back to two and twenty c , the exact number of the Hebrew letters, and thus reckoned : 1. Genesis. 2. Exodus. 3. Leviticus. 4. Numbers. 5. Deu¬ teronomy. 6. Joshua. 7. Judges and Ruth. 8. The first and second Books of Samuel. 9. The first and second Books of Kings. 10. The first and second Books of Chronicles. 11. The first and second Books of Esdras. 12. The Book of Hester. 13. The Book of Job. 14. The Psalms. 15. Proverbs. 16. Ecclesiastes. 17. The Song of Solomon. 18. Isaiah. 19- Jeremiah and Lamentations. 20. Ezechiel. 21. Daniel. 22. The twelve lesser Prophets. Ruth, the Book of Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, Lamentations, Daniel, the Book of Esther, Ezra, Chronicles. Bava Bathra, c. i. f. 14. [2.] c That the twenty-four were re¬ duced to twenty-two appears from Josephus : ov pvpiddes (3 l(3\ioov elcrl nap ’ fjplv aavpcpwvcov Kal paxopivav, 8vo pova npos rois e lkoctl fiifiXla rod navros e^ovra xpovov ri)v avaypa- mo® ins mm nncn pis nso: sin® ®ipn mi p ®s 001 D'mm O'llSI : '®'on nrn®n i. e. the ark with the mercy-seat and cherubims one; the Divine presence the second; the spirit of holiness, which is the spirit of prophecy, the third; the Urim and Thummim the fourth; the fire from heaven the fifth. Aruch, in in. But were not Malachi, Haggai, and Zachariah all prophets in the second temple ? To this R. Bechai answers, that the Divine presence and prophecy was indeed there sVs mu 101 ion 11 nm® s 1 ?® VI. Holy Scriptures for Salvation. 207 that after his time the spirit of prophecy ceased among the Jews, and so that no book or books that were written after that time were written by a prophetical spirit, nor therefore can be of Divine authority. And it is as certain that these Apocryphal books were written all after that time. For if they had been written before, and that by the spirit of pro¬ phecy, certainly Ezra would have received them with the other into the canon of the scriptures, which it is plain, from what hath been shewn, that he did not. And again, who knoweth not that the History of the Maccabees was long after that time, unless the history of them would have been made before themselves : which if it had, it would have been a prophecy, not a history, as really as it is now a history, and not a prophecy. And so for the other books, besides that there is something almost in every one of them which betrays their novelty in respect of the antiquity of the ancient prophets : for if they had been written when the other pro¬ phets wrote, they would have been written in the same lan¬ guage that the other prophets wrote in, especially they would never have written in Greek, (as it is plain they did,) when the Greek language then was, like the people, accounted profane, and the Hebrew language themselves used, of all the lan¬ guages in the world was only accounted holy, and therefore only fit to write such holy things in. And if from scripture we pass to reason, one might think this is reason enough to reject the Divine authority of these books, because not delivered to us in the same language that the other are. As it was the Hebrew language that disco¬ vered God's people from all other people, so certainly it is the Hebrew language that may discover God's scripture from all other scriptures. But again, if these Apocryphal writings be any part of the word of God, they are either part of the Old or New Testament; one of them they must needs be, because these two Testaments contain the whole word of God. But : pnEfcO i. e. but it was not there 8 e ’A pra^ep^ov P^XP 1 T °v Ka @ f)pas always as it was in the first house. xP° vov yeyparrrai pev eKaara‘ 7 ri¬ ll. Bechai in Pentat. [fol. to:.] im- crreoos S' ovx opoias ^|icorai to7s 7rpo plying that though it was there iavr&v Sta to prj yeveaOcu tt)v tow a while so long as those prophets 7 rpo(pr]Tcov ciKpifirj diadoxrjv. Joseph, lived, yet after that it ceased. Hence contra Apion. Lib. 1. [8.] it is that Josephus himself saith, «7ro 208 Of the Sufficiency of the Art. first, they are no part of the New Testament, for then they would discover something of the birth, or life, or death, or doctrine of Christ the Son of God, which it is plain they do not. Neither, secondly, are they any part of the Old Testa¬ ment, for then the Jews would have used them before our Saviour’s coming, as well as any Christians have done since: s but 1 dare challenge any one whatsoever to shew me any one place in either of the Talmuds, in any of the Targums, or indeed in any of the Jewish writers, where they make mention of any of these books. If they had been any part of the Old Testament, why was there not also a masora made upon them as well as upon the other books ? How came it to pass that they were left out and others taken into the number of canonical books by Ezra? Was not he a prophet? Did not he write canonical books himself? And how then should not he be able to discern betwixt canonical and apocryphal books ? Neither were the Jews only unacquainted with the books so long ago, but to this day ask any of them, and they will tell you there is nothing scripture, nothing the word of God, nothing of Divine authority but what is ordinarily read in their synagogues, which I am sure these books never yet were. But because the judgment of the primitive church may be of the greatest weight in this case, I shall endeavour, in the next place, to discover, that our church doth here, as in all other things, tread exactly in the steps of the ancient Fa¬ thers. And in shewing the judgment of the primitive church, I might first produce the canons of the apostles (so called) themselves, which, though it be no convincing argument in itself, yet it is to the adversaries unto this truth who do so 8 That the Jews received not any of these books into the canon of the scripture I have before shewed, in discovering the number of canonical books which they reckoned upon to be but twenty-two, or at most twen¬ ty-four. There we may see the Tal¬ mud, Josephus, and some Fathers’ testimonies for it, to which we may add these : Quomodo igitur viginti duo elementa sunt per quae scribi- mus Hebraice omne quod loquimur, et eorum initiis vox humana com- prehenditur, ita viginti duo volumina supputantur quibus quasi literis et exordiis in Dei literis tenera adhuc et lactens viri justi erudiatur infantia. Hieron. in Prol. [Sam. vol. IX. p. 455.] Hebraei vetus Testamentum Esdra autore juxta numerum litera- rum suarum viginti duobus libris aceipiunt, dividentes eos in tres or- dines, Legis videlicet et Prophetarum et Hagiographorum. Isidor. Orig. 1. 6. c. 1. VI. 209 Holy Scriptures for Salvation. confidently affirm the apostles themselves to be the authors of them. For these very canons do number the books of the Old Testament after the same manner that we do, differing in nothing but the three Books of the Maccabees, and leaving out Ezra. But for all the other books which some would now bring in as canonical, they left out as apocryphal. But throwing these into h the margent, let us inquire into the primitive church; and if we here cast our eyes upon Eusebius, in him we shall find Melito writing to Onesimus, who had often desired him to acquaint him with the number and order of the books of the Old Testament, and satisfying his desire after this manner 1 : “ Going therefore,” saith he, “ into the East, and being in the place where these things were preached and done, and diligently learning the books of the Old Testa¬ ment, I have here sent them underwritten to you; the names whereof are these : the five books of Moses, Genesis, Exodus, h v E(tto) ndcriv vpiv KXqpiKois kcl'l \diKOLs pifiXia aeftacrpia Kai dyia, ra pev rraXaias biaOqKqs Mojo'ccos nevre, Teveais, J/ E £obos, AeviriKov, Apidpoi, Aevrepovopiov’ ’I qcrov viov Navq ev’ Kpiridv ev’ 'Povd ev' Bacn- Xeicdv reacrapa’ Hapa\eL7ropeva)V rqs (3i(3Xov rcdv qpepidv bvo * ’E (rrqp ev‘ MaKa(3a'iKcdv rpia’ T&>/3 ev' ^aXrqpiov ev’ 'EoXopcdvros rpia, Uapoipiai, ’Ek- KXrjcnacrTr)s, ’A la pa aaparoov’ II pocfiq- T(dv beKabvo’ ev’Hcraiov' 'I epepiov ev' I e^eKiqX ev' AaviqX ev. Canon. A- post. [85. p. 56. vol. I. Synodic. Beveregii.] * ’AveXdciov ovv els rqv avaroXqv kci'l ecos tov T07rov yevdpevos evOa eKq- pvyff) teal enpaxOr] Kai aKpificds pa~ fliov ra rqs naXaias biaSqKqs fiifiXia inToratjas €7rep\j/d croi’ hv eari ra ovopara' Mcocrecos nevre, Tevearis, V E £obos, AeviriKov, ’ ApiBpoi, Aevre¬ povopiov’ T qarovs N avq, Kpirai, 'P ov8‘ BacriXeidov reacrapa, UapaXenropevodv bvo, tyaXpcdv Aafiib, 2 oXopedvos Ila- poipiai, f) 'Socfoia, y ~EKKXqcria(rrqs, ’Ai- apa acrpdrcov, Ta>/3, npoifiqTcdv, ’H- erdiov, 'I epepiov, rcdv bcobeKa ev povo- flifiX co, AavirjX, Te^e/ar/A, "EcrbpaS' Euseb. Hist. Eccles. 1 . 4. c. 26. Lat. 25. Nothing can be objected against this catalogue, but that after 2oAo- BEVERIDGE. pedvos napoiplai he adds q croipiai which some would persuade us de¬ notes the Book of Wisdom, com¬ monly called Apocryphal. But Ruffinus gives us another exposition of the words, translating them Salo- monis Proverbia, qua et Sapientia, and so making Wisdom here to be but the same with Proverbs, two names of one thing; and truly it seems; for q croepia in some copies is read q Kai aoepia; and therefore is it that in the margent to mine q Kai ao(j)[a is put in as another reading; and therefore also in Nicephorus are the same words translated Salo- monis Proverbia sive Sapientia, so that he plainly read it 2oXopa>vos rrapoipiai q croepia. And truly it was an easy mistake afterwards to write q for q, and thus we find the Proverbs often called the Wisdom of Solo¬ mon : Ov povos be ovtos (saith Euse¬ bius,) dXXa , ErreLT ’A piOpol, elra AevTepos N 6pos- 1 'ErreiT ’I 7 ]crovs Kal KpiTcu , 'P ov9 oy86r). 'H Se eva.Tr) ZeKa.Tr) re fi'ifiAoi rrpa^eis Ba.(riAr)eov, Kal na.paAeirr6iJ.evcu , eax aT0V ’'EarZpav * X * LS ' A i Se a’TiX'ppaX rrevTe, wv rrparTos ’Ico/3. "'Err eiTa Aa/318, elra Tpels 'SoAopovTeiai, * EKKAr)cria(TTr)s , ’Acapa, /cal fl apoiplai. Kal rrevtf opolcos rrveiparos rrpocpr)TiKOv. M iav pev elcrlv els ypacprjv 01 8a>5e/ca, ' ri(Tr)e , KAphs, Kal Mi^a/as 0 TpiTOS. ^ETretT 1 ’ IwrjA, e?T* ’Icovas , ’A/35/as, Naot^a tc, ’ ApfiaKovp Te‘ Kal Hocpovias, ’A yyaios, e?Ta Za%ap/as, Kal M a Aa%/as, M/a pev o'ISe’ deinepa 5e ’Hcratas ’'ErreiO* 6 KArjdels 'I epeplas e/c fipecpous. > 'ErreiT ’Ie^e/ct^A, Kal AavirjAos X“P ts - 'Apxaias pev e/fy/ce Saco Kal efcoai /3/- jSAous Tots Tu>v 'Efipatwv ypappamv avTiQeTovs. Greg. Naz. p. 98. edit. Paris. Gr. Lat. [vol. II.] J Ourcos y ovv crvyKeivrai ai ( 3 l/ 3 \oi ev nevTdTevxois rerapai, Kal pevovaiv ctAAai Si1/0 vcrTepovorai. cos eivai ras evdiadeTovs ( 3 l( 3 \ovs ovtcos, rrevve pev vopiKus Teveaiv, v E£oSoi/, AeviriKov, Apidpovs, Aevrepovopiov' avTi 7 rj nev- raTevxos Kal rj vopoOecrla. IleVre yap a-Tixrjpeis, rj roC ’lw /3 ( 3 l@\os, eira to VI. Holy Scriptures for Salvation. 211 (canonical) books contained in four Pentateuchs, other two remaining behind. So that the canonical books are thus : five legislative books, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deu¬ teronomy ; that is, the Pentateuch and the giving of the Law. And five poetical books; the Book of Job, then the Psalter, the Proverbs of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs. Then another Pentateuch, which is called the Writings , and by some the Holy Writings or Ilagiographa ; which are thus: the Book of Joshua the son of Nun, of Judges with Kuth, the first of the Chronicles with the second, the first of the Kings with the second, and the third of the Kings with the fourth; that is the third Pentateuch. Another Penta¬ teuch is, the twelve lesser Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Eze- chiel, and Daniel; and that is the prophetical Pentateuch. But there remain two more; one is Ezra, which is also reckoned, and another book called Hester: and so the two and twenty books are completed / 1 And this is the number of canonical books which Amphilochius also gives us m , as we may see in the margent. But these you will say were particular persons; but was there ever any council or synod before that of ours which ever determined the number of canonical books as ours did ? Yes, the Laodicsean council itself, assembled in the third cen- 'fyaXTrjpiov, Uapotpiai SoXopcovTOS, ’ EKKXrjcna(TTrjs, ’Alapa acrpaTeov’ elra aXXr] 7 revTaTevxos ra KaXovpeva ypa- (j)e 7 a, 7 rapa rial 8 e dyioypa(f)a Xe-yo- peva, anva eanv oiircos, ’Irjcrov tov N avrj ( 3 l( 3 Xos } KpLTcov pera rrjs 'P ovO, HapaXeiTropevcov npoiTrj pera rrjs 8 ev- repas, BaaiXeioov 7 rpa>TT] pera rrjs 8 ev- repas, Bao’iXeixbv Tpirr/ pera rrjs re- rdpTrjs. Avrrj rplrq pev nevTarevxos. aXXrj 7 revTa.T€vxos to 8 co$eKa 7 rp 6 (j)r]Tov, ’Hfraiay, ‘I epepiag, ’E £eKir]X, AavLrjX, kcu avTt) rj 7 rpo/3, ift diodeKa II prxprjrai, iff *H adias, K 'I epeplas Kai B apovfo Qprjvot, Kai ’ E7rto"roAat , tea J \e£eKiifX, left AavirjX. ra de rrjs Kaivr/s diadrjKrjs ravra, EvayyeXia reaaapa, Kara Mar- Qalov, Kara M apKov, Kara Aovkclv, Kara ’ leoavvqv’ Tlpd^eis dnocrroXaiv, ‘EniaroXal KaOnXindi enra, ovtcos, ’Iokco/Sov pla, Uerpov dvo, 'icodvvov rpels, ’I ovda pla’ eniaroXai Ilav- A ov deKareao-apes, npos 'Poopalovs pla, 7 rpds KopivOlovs dvo, npos Ta- Aaras pla, npos 'E(j)eo-lovs pla, npos <&iXinnlovs pla, npos K 0 A 00 -- craeis pla, npos QeaaaXoviKels dvo, npos e E(3palovs pla, npos TipoOeov dvo, npos Tlrov pla, npos <&iXr)pova pla , Concil. Laodic. Canon. 60. [Synodic. Beveregii, vol. I. p. 481.] Where for c lepeplas Kai Bapov^, Qprj- voi Kai ’EmirroXai , Mercator hath only Jeremias, they all signifying but one and the same thing, and therefore do they all make up but one, viz. the twentieth book, re¬ ceived by this ancient synod into the canon of the scriptures; and therefore is it also that I have trans¬ lated them likewise but by two words, Jeremiah and Lamentations, adding Lamentations distinctly, be¬ cause so used by us, though fre¬ quently accounted but part of Jere¬ miah by the Fathers. VI. 213 Holy Scriptures for Salvation. But the Books of the New Testament are these : four Gospels; according to St. Matthew, according to St. Mark, according to St. Luke, and according to St. John: the Acts of the Apostles: the seven General Epistles; of St. James one, of of St. Peter two, of St. John three, of St. Jude one. The Epistles of St. Paul the Apostle fourteen : to the Romans one, to the Corinthians two, to the Galatians one, to the Ephe¬ sians one, to the Philippians one, to the Colossians one, to the Thessalonians two, to Timothy two, to Titus one, to Philemon one, to the Hebrews one.” Thus we see how careful the Fathers are to bring the canonical books into the scriptures; and truly they are as careful to keep the apocryphal out. They acknowledge them indeed lawful to be read, as we do, but not of the same authority with the former. So Athanasius 0 : “But besides these, there are other books of the Old Testament not received into the canon of the scriptures, but only read to the catechumens, or such as are to be instructed in the Christian religion; as, the Wisdom of Solomon, 1,1 and the rest, which he names in order. And EpiphaniusP saith: “They are useful and profitable indeed, but are not brought into the number of canonical books.” And St. Hierome^ saith: “ As therefore the church reads indeed Judith, and Tobit, and the books of the Maccabees, but doth not receive them amongst canonical scriptures; so these two books (viz. the Book of Wisdom and Jesus the son of Syrach) the church may read for the edification and instruction of the people, but not to confirm the authority of ecclesiastical doctrines.” Which I suppose is the place intended in this Article, where St. IJie- rome is quoted. So Lyra r : “ But whatsoever is without ° *E#cr6s de tovtoov elcri ncikiv erepa Machabeeorum libros legit quidem £b/ 3 Aia rrjs avTrjs 7 rakaids diaOrjiajs ov ecclesia, sed eos inter canonicas Kavovi^ofxeva pev , avayivoocrKopeva de scripturas non recipit : sic et hsec povov tols Karr]^ovfjievoL9, ravra’ 2o- duo volumina legat ad asdificationem d>s, re f) Kaivrj (diaOrjKT)), evda roacivTa dveTrerdaSr ]; ei >6a tocjovtov icrri to peo-ov, ocrov el t ois ovdev rrkeov rrjs yrjs eldocn tov ovpavov tis avoifeeie, Kai ndvra noirj- croi Karonrevaai. Chrys. in 2 Tim. horn. 8. [vol. IV. p. 368.] c 'O yap ev X.(opfj(3 naXaios fjdr] vdpos vpcov (T ov8ala>v) povov, 6 de 7rdvT(ov dnXcos’ vopos de Kara vo- pov redels tov npo avrov ei rav Just. Dial, cum Tryph. [11.] 218 Of the Old Testament. Art. Testament takes in the Gentiles also as well as Jews. Lastly, They differ likewise in their duration. The Old Testament was but to continue till Christ’s first coming; the New to his second. The Old lasted no longer than Christ’s descending from heaven, for himself to be judged by the sons of men; but the New is to last till his descending from heaven, to have the sons of men judged by himself. In a word, the Law was to last no longer than to the beginning of the Gospel; the Gospel is to last to the end of the world. And thus we see in how many circumstances the Old and New Testament differ, yet notwithstanding they exactly agree in the substance. So that the one is not contrary to the other; what the one asserts, the other doth not deny; and what the one denies, the other doth not assert. And though the one only promises that Christ shall come, and the other assures us he is come; yet they both promise salvation only upon his account. So that the Fathers of the Old Testament were saved only by Christ, who was born after they were dead, as well as the children of the New Testament are saved by the same Christ, who was dead before they were born. And therefore they are not to he heard , or if they be heard, they are not to be believed, that feign that the old Fathers did look only for transitory promises ; which is a clear inference from the premises. For if the overtures of grace and life were made in Christ to them under the Law, as well as to us under the Gospel; it must needs follow, that the same promises that we have made to us under the Gospel were also made to them under the Law: and therefore the promises that we look for being spiritual, and not transitory, the promises that they looked for likewise were not only transitory, but also spiritual. The sum of all is this : Everlasting life and happi¬ ness was offered in Christ under the Old as well as under the New Testament. So that the old Fathers did not go one way to heaven and we another, but the same way that we go now they went then; and they had the same promises then that we have now. The truth whereof appeareth from scripture, reason, and Fathers. And in producing of scripture for this, we may first take notice of the dawning of the gospel light to our first parents VII. Of the Old Testament. 219 in that gracious promise; It shall bruise thy head , and thou shalt bruise his heel d , Gen. iii. 15. Where, after the DeviFs conquest over man, man is immediately promised a greater conquest over him. And therefore, whether by the seed of the woman the person of Christ in particular, or the posterity of Adam in general is intended, be sure e Christ is promised; for in that it is a promise it must needs be made in him, in whom all the promises are yea and amen , 2 Cor. i. 20 ; and see¬ ing the promise was made in him, he could not but be implied in the promise. As it was in the first Adam that the Devil conquered us, so it is only by the second Adam that we can conquer him. Which second Adam is here first promised to the first, that so we might all receive the promise of life in him, as we all fell into the threatened death by him. And that this was the promise of life, and so a spiritual promise, is clear, in that it is a promise of conquest over the father of d The Hebrew words here, Kin \dx"i "joriru, being rendered by the vulgar Latin, Ipsa conteret caput tuum, the papists make use of this place to ground their M apioXarpela upon, as if the promise was to be understood concerning her, that she, viz. Mary, should bruise the ser¬ pent’s head. And, to evade the force of the pronoun sin, they would persuade us, that before the punctuation of the Bible or Hebrew text it was s'n. But I would have them consider, i. that the verb is in the masculine gender, as well as the pronoun sin, and therefore if they turn sin into x'rr, they must turn fDVC.u into 'jDitfjn too, or else make a false construction. 2. That all the Oriental translations read it bnn, not xtt. For the Samaritan, both text and version, reads it, NTiu the Chaldee, 'ii' win pmpbn rr 1 ? rmn no “j 1 ? vm, Ipse recordabitur tibi qua; ei fecisti in principio. And so the Syriac, cpj; csv-Ojj oor, Ipsum concul- cabit, vel, ’contundet caput tuum. And so the Arabic also renders it, He shall break or bruise; and though the Latin trans¬ lation of the Arabic render it by hcec, it is not because the pronoun is feminine in the Arabic, but be¬ cause the noun is feminine in the Latin wherewith it doth agree, viz. stirps. To this we might add, that the Persian also renders it by and the Greek by avros, which cer¬ tainly they would not have done had they read «’n and not bon. So that the right translation of the words cannot be as the Latin, Ipsa conteret caput tuum , but rather as our English hath it, It (viz. the seed) shall bruise thy head. e Deus omnipotens et clemens statim ut nos diabolica malignitas veneno suse inortificavit invidise, prsedestinata renovandis mortalibus suse pietatis remedia inter ipsa mun- di primordia prsesignavit, denunci- ans serpenti futurum semen mulie- ris, quod noxii capitis elationem sua virtute contereret, Christum viz. in carne venturum, qui natus ex vir- gine violatorem humanse propaginis incorrupta nativitate damnaret. Leo Serm. 2. de nativitate. 220 Of the Old Testament. Art. death, the Devil. And that Christ is also promised in these words, appears in that it is he alone of all the seed of the woman that bruised the serpent’s head. Indeed, Christ is so clearly promised in these words, that not only Christians, but the Jews themselves in their f Targum acknowledge and avouch it. And this was the only promise that we read of that the old world and many generations after had to live upon, and the only gospel to believe in, which, notwithstand¬ ing, was enough, yea as much as we have now for substance. For the same Christ was promised to them that is given to us, and they had as much cause to believe he would come, as we have to believe he is come. The reason why we so believe Christ is come, is because God hath told us he is so; and they had as much reason to believe he would come, seeing the same God had told them he would do so. And certainly their believing in him that was to come was as effectual to the justification of their persons, as our believing in him that is come ; for it is not he as to come hereafter, or as come already, but as God-man, that is the Mediator betwixt God and man. And this promise or abstract of the Gospel being made to Adam, the head of mankind, all mankind were interested in it, so that none of them that should act faith upon it but might receive life and salvation from it. And thus it con¬ tinued for above two thousand years together, viz. from Adam to the flood, and from the flood to Abraham; at which time the most high God, seeing mankind in general faithless and unbelieving, was pleased to pick out from amongst them f So we find in the Hierusalem Targum, Et erit, quando filii mu- lieris operam dabunt legi et fecerint man data, studebunt tibi conterere caput et Occident te. Quando vero relinquent filii mulieris legis prae- cepta nec servabunt mandata, tu operam dabis ut mordeas eos in calcaneis ipsorum, et ita noceas eis. Verum erit remedium filiis mulie¬ ris, tibi autem serpenti nullum erit remedium; quandoquidem futurum est ut ipsi alii aliis incolumitatem praestent in calcaneo apy rpoa Nrruin tobm 'idv: «'dv, in fine extremitatis dierum in diebus regis Messiae. Gen. iii. 15. Targ. Hier. And Jonathan’s Targ. pvrrn ’TDVl Nlp’jn NnVDtD srrttJD. Quia illi futuri sunt adhi- bere medicinam calcaneo in diebus regis Messiae. Ibid. Jonath.—Both intimating that this promise hath reference to the Messiah, and that the conquest that is here promised, the seed of the woman, shall only be by him. VII. Of the Old Testament. 221 one person to manifest his love more graciously, and his pro¬ mise or gospel more clearly to ; and that was Abraham; who believing in the former promise or gospel made to Adam, and delivered down from Adam unto him, this his faith was accounted unto him for righteousness ; and being not yet cir¬ cumcised , the apostle tells us, it was reckoned to him not in circumcision , but in uncircumcision , Rom. iv. 10. But being first accounted righteous by the righteousness of the promised seed by faith applied by him, and through grace imputed to him, God was pleased to renew his covenant he had made in Adam with him, and to give him the seal of this the right¬ eousness he had by faith, even circumcision, as the apostle informs us, saying, And lie received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised , Rom. iv. 11. So that circumcision was not imputed to him for righteousness; but it was only sthe seal of that righteousness of faith which was before imputed to him. He being accounted righteous by God, because be¬ lieving in the promised Messiah, God gives him a sacrament or seal to confirm this his faith, even circumcision, which was as real and effectual a sacrament to him h as baptism is to us. For as baptism seals the righteousness of Christ to us, so did 8 Kat yap avros 6 ’ Aft paap ev aKpoftwrla cov 8ui rrjv nlcrTiv rjv iiri- arevrre rip Qeaj e8iKaid)6r), Kal evXo- yi']&rj, cos rj ypaKe nepiroprjs, crcfipa- yl8a’ otl yap npos rrjv 8iKaiocrvvrjv ov8ev avrrj avvreXeC l8ov teat avros 6 8ls, kcu ev ckclvco XaXijcrav, kcu ev fjplv evppyrjcre' BEVERIDGE. ttov vvv elAv oi tt]v rraXaiav 8ia(3aX- Xovres kcu to croipa tt}? ypa(f)rjs 8ia- aTrcovres, Ka\ rrj Kcuvr) pcv dXXov ere- pov 8e tj] TraXaia Qeov cnvovepowes \ Chrysost. els ro/'Exovres de to civtq Ilvevpa, vol. V. p. 376 . Q 226 Of the Old Testament. Art. heaven ? Certainly, should God have said, I will give them crowns and sceptres, heaven and happiness, such words would have come short of what is promised in these few words, I will he their God. So that should all the angels in heaven, and men on earth, study to eternity to find out a greater promise than this is, it would be impossible. Nay, indeed it is impossible that God himself should find out any thing more than himself, to promise to his people. And yet even this the °head of all promises, comprehending all good things whatsoever, was made to them of the Old, as well as to us of the New Testament; and therefore, had they never another promise besides this, they could not but have all spiritual, as well as transitory promises in this one. And as the enjoyment of God, and so everlasting happiness, was promised in the Old, as well as in the New Testament, so was it promised then too, as well as now, only in Jesus Christ; there being no other Mediator to reconcile God to us, and us to God, because none but he ever was or ever will be both God and man. And whosoever is God only and not man, or man only and not God, can never P mediate betwixt God and man. For he that is God only cannot suffer for man; and he that is man only cannot make satisfaction to God: and therefore to make a person capable of suffering for man, and able to satisfy God, and so to mediate betwixt God and man, by suffering for the sins of the one, and satisfying the justice of the other; it is necessary that himself participate of both natures, which being joined together in one Person might so be reconciled to one another. Now seeing there never was nor ever will be any such person in the world besides Christ, and seeing Christ was exactly such a person, perfect God and perfect man, it necessarily follows, that it was he, and he alone, that could be the Mediator betwixt God and man in ° "Qare elvai crov Geos' (prjcri, kcu tov crneppaTos aov peTCi ere' tovto yap ctol ecrrai to Ke(pa\aiov tcov aya- 6cc>v, eroi re v drjpiovpyos, 6 ovpavov kcu yrjs Troir)TT]s (for]criv, ’Eyco eipu 6 Geos' crov' p-eyas 6 oyKOs rrjs riprjs rr/s eh tov dhaiov. Ibid. [p. 318.^ V. et Carthus. in loc. P AvOpconos ovk av eyevero pecrl- Ti)s, eSei yap roi Ge 7repiToprjs 7rpeo-(3vTepav e^ei rrjv npoavappr/mv, icai oti 7rpoKaT€ypd6r)va.L 7 Tore, nXrjv on 8id povov 'Kpiarov tov 8lkcuovvtos tov acrefir) Kcii avievTos eyK\-qpaTa‘ kcu 7 rpos ye 8rj tovtois on Qeov KXrjpovopoi, kcii iv toIs oti paXicrTci yvrjcrlois kcitci- T€TQ.(~OVTClL TeKVOlS, Ol €K TT]S €7Tay- yeXias Trjs ev I aaaK yeyevrjpevrjs rrpos tov pciKcipiov ’A (3paap, Hcec sunt prcecepta et leges atque judicia , where vogoi, de¬ notes the ceremonial, and ju¬ dicia, the judicial laws. And so the word c'pn is to be taken too in the 17th verse of this chapter, viz. Deut. vi., where it is said, pnoirn moM? vpm vnnji ornix mm muo ns mu ycn, Custodiendo custodietis prcecepta Domini Dei vestri et testi- monia ejus et statute ejus quee pree- cepit tibij where n’pn, statuta, the Syriac renders again by vogoi, the vulgar Latin expressly ceremonies. The Septuagint there and elsewhere usually renders it by ducaion/iara, which properly signifies prcecepta, or, mandate Dei de ex¬ tern is ceremoniis, and so is always distinguished from cvtoXci'i, prcecepta moralia. VII. Of the Old Testament. 231 First, concerning the ceremonial law, it is here said, Although the law given from God by Moses , as touching cere- monies and rites , do not bind Christian men , implying, that that law is now of no force and virtue in obliging us to obedience, as it did the Jews: where we may briefly consider, first, what this law was; secondly, how it appears to be now disannulled. As for the first, what this law was, it is plain that it was that law whereby God was pleased to determine the outward circumstances of his own worship, and the outward per¬ formances of his people’s lives, containing several precepts: 1st, concerning their sacraments, viz. circumcision, and the eating of the paschal lamb; to which may be added also the eating of the shewbread, and their purification from several uncleannesses, as when any one was a leper, had touched a dead body, or the like. 2dly, Concerning their sacrifices; whether sin-offerings, or heave-offerings, or burnt-offerings; whether offered by the high priest only, by the ordinary priest, by all the people, or private persons; as also whether they were of living creatures, as goats or kids, rams or lambs, heifers or calves, doves or turtles; or inanimate, as bread or wine or oil. 3dly, Concerning their holy things: as, first, their holy places; as the tabernacle and temple, the one carried up and down, the other fixed, divided into three parts; the holy of holies, where the high priest only came, and that but once a year; the sanctuary, where the ordinary priests went continually; and the outward court, where the people stood: secondly, holy times; as their sabbaths, new moons, passover, pentecost, feast of tabernacles, the feast of in-gathering, the feast of trumpets, the day of atonement, Lev. xxiii.; the sabbatical year also, and the year of jubilee. 4thly, Concerning outward observances in priests or people; as, not to eat such and such flesh, not to wear such and such clothes, not to plough with an ox and an ass together, and such like. Thus we see what these ceremonies and rites were. Now, secondly, that they are not obligatory unto us, as they were to the Jews, appears from the determination of that canonical synod holden by the apostles themselves at Hieru- salem, Acts xv. where this question being debated, whether circumcision, and so the other ceremonies of the law, should 232 Of the Old Testament. Art. be enjoined the Gentiles, they determined it in the negative, that the Gentiles which were turned to God should not be troubled with these things. Hence it is that we read St. Paul, writing to the Colossians, Let no man therefore judge you either in meat or drink , or in rested of a holy day , new moon , or sab¬ bath days , Col. ii. 16; and to the Galatians, If you be circum¬ cised ', Christ yrofiteth you nothing , Gal. v. 2. And he acquaints the Hebrews with the reason of it; For the priesthood being changed , there is made of necessity a change also of the law , Heb. vii. 12, viz. the ceremonial law, which being at the first in¬ stituted and imposed only until the time of reformation , Heb. ix. 10, even until the coming of Christ, who was the substance of those shadows and the truth of those types, there was no need of them when once himself was come, nor indeed any law for them. For seeing the law enjoined them for no longer a time than till Christ was come, and the time in his coming being expired, the law enforcing them must needs be disan¬ nulled. So that now we are no ways bound to use any of the aforesaid ceremonies, they being no furtherances now, as they were under the law, but rather C hinderances of our faith in Christ the substance : but they are to us Christians as if they had never been imposed at all upon the Jews, even without any binding or obligatory force at all in them d , as the Fathers taught of old. c Cecidit Hierusalem, cecidit tem- plum, altare sublatum est, &c. Ratio autem qua haec cuncta desinerent ilia est, ut omne os obstruatur, et subditus fiat omnis mundus Deo, ne qui forte ex incredulo populo occasiones slice infidelitatis accipe- rent, et habentes umbras antiquitus sibi traditas, vel templi vel altaris vel pontificii vel sacerdotii, vide- rentur sibi permanente antiqui cul- tus statu prsevaricari religionis or- dinem, si transiret ad fidem. Prop- terea ergo auferri haec omnia, quae in terris dudum fuerant adumbrata, divina providentia dispensavit, ut viam quodammodo accipiant requi- rendae veritatis cessantibus typis. Grig, in Jes. Nave, horn. 17. [vol. II- P- 437-] d Et yap 7 rpo tov ’A ftpaap ovk rjv Xpeia 7T€piTopijS) ov 8 e npo Mcouereto? crafifiaTiapov Kal eoprcov Kal 7rpocr(po- pd>v, ov 8 e vvv pera t'ov Kara ttjv (3ov- \rjv tov Qeov, 8 l%a dpaprlas Trjs cmo yevovs tov ’A| 3paap irapOevov yevvq- OevTa Ylov Qeov ’ Irjcrovv XpurTov, opouos e( rrt xpeta. Just. Dial, cum Trypb. [23.] 'Qs ovv 0.776 'Afipaap rjp^aTO TrepiTopr), Kal dno Mcoo-etos crd[ii(3aTov Kal Ovaiai Kal Tvpoircfiopal Kal eopral , Kal anedel^dr] 8 l 6 to okAt]- poKapdiov tov Xaov vpcov ravTa fita- rerirydat, ovtcos navaaadai e' 8 ei koto, ttjv tov UaTpos ftovXrjv els tov 8iq Tvjs a 7 ro tov yevovs tov ’AjS paap Kal (fyvXrjs I ov 8 a Kal A a/318 napOevov yev- vrjOevTa Ylov tov Qeov XpLCTov. Ibid. £ 43 .] Kat tovto 7 racr^et napa to ayvo&v, OTi tj ocopaTiKrj tov vopov VII. Of the Old Testament. 233 Secondly, Of the judicial law it is here said, nor the civil precepts thereof ought of necessity to be received in any commonwealth: civil precepts; that is, whatsoever precepts we find in the law of Moses concerning state-polity, or the civil government of the Jewish nations; as concerning their magistrates, contracts, distribution of inheritances, wit¬ nesses, several punishments of blasphemy, perjury, and the like. These laws, though they could not without sin have been neglected by the Jews, yet it is here said there is no necessity of their being received into other commonwealths; which certainly there is not. For though these laws were made by God, and so were certainly the best that ever were or can be made, yet seeing they were made only for that rrjpTlo'i-s, €7ri rfj imdqplq tov Xpiarov Karr]pyr]Tai , tcov Tinreov Xoinov pera- XqipdevTcov els tt)v aXrjBeiav’ apyovai yap oi \v%voi rrj tov fjXlov rvapovala’ Ka'i cr^oXa^Vi 6 vopos, #cai ol npoipr/Tai Karao-iyd^ovrai rrjs dXrjBelas avacf)a- velarjs. Basil, de S. Spiritu, [vol. II.] c. 21. And St. Chrysostome proves it excellently out of the law itself, that its ceremonies were to cease in Christ: Kai 7 tov tovto (vopos) eine , (prjalv, on ev Xpiarco Karapyelrai; ovk elne povov, aXXa Ka'i did npaypd- toov edei£e‘ /cat 7 Tpcorov pev ra> ras Bvcrlas Ka\ rrjv dyiorrelav anacrav ev ev\ KaTa/cXeiaai roireo r” OTrep ov povov ovk evavTLOvpevov fjv, aXXa Kal crvyKporovvTOS avTrjv. Chrysost. in Mat. hom. 16. [vol. II. p. 107 .] VII. Of the Old Testament. 237 are now so far from being free from them, that we are more bound than before to perform obedience to them. As Peter is said to be bound with two chains , Acts xii. 6 ; so are we now bound to the obligation of the law as it were with a double cord; the one made by God our Maker, the other by God- man our Mediator. Hence it is that the apostle saith, Do we then make void the law through faith ? God forbid: yea , we establish the law , Rom. iii. 31. So that the law is so far from being abolished, that it is established by & faith, even by that faith that justifies a sinner, which the law without faith could never do; and therefore it is established by its attaining that end for which it was at the first enacted, even the justification of such as were subject to it. Nay, and further, the law through Christ is also established, by having perfect obedi¬ ence performed to it, which without him it could never have had : all other persons in the world that were made under the law were transgressors of it, but only he who was perfectly obedient unto it. And so he did not teach us by precept only, but by example also, to obey the moral law. Which things being considered, though we cannot deny but that we are redeemed by Christ from the curse of the law , Gal. iii. 13, from being justified only by the law, and from the rigour of the law, that it would accept of no obedience but what was h every way perfect and complete; I say, though we may be said to be thus free from the law, yet we are not free from performing obedience unto it. So that we Christians, that believe in a crucified Jesus, are bound to keep the moral law, as well as the Jews that expect a promised Messiah. 8 Kat 7Tcos earr]ae, (j.orjal ; tl r/v tov vopov to epyov ; kcu tlvos eveTi^ovTa i)pcov tcls ihavoias' prjde'is Xeyerco ovk dveyvav vopov, ovk oi8a tcl tov vopov * iav yap dpvrjcrr] tov kolvov vopov, c\eyx*i o’* o tt)s deXrjpari avrov, e£j oXps laxdos rjpcov ipyacriopeOa epyov diKaioavvrjs. Ibid. [P- 43-1 240 Of the Old Testament. Art. certainly we cannot be free from them, who are bound to be like him, 1 Pet. i. 15. St. Basil also shews how the same things are commanded in the New Testament that were commanded in the Old, m “ That the Lord both in the Old and New Testament hath the same end in his commands, even to meet with the effects of sin, and to cut wickedness off in the very first beginning. For as the old law said, Thou shalt not commit adultery; but the Lord Christ, Thou shalt not covet: and that, Thou shalt not steal [kill]; but he, commanding perfecter things, Thou shalt not he angry: so here, the law is content with swearing aright, but he cutteth off the very occasion of perjury. 1 '’ So that the same law is not only now in force that it was before, but that also in a stricter sense; and therefore he saith elsewhere, u That Christ n came not to destroy the Law and the Prophets, hut to fulfil them , and to add more perfect things to them. 11 And so the same Father again in another place speaks fully to our purpose. “ But ° because of those things that are in use with us, some are delivered by the command of God in the holy scripture, others passed by in silence: concerning these things that are written, there is no power given to any one whatsoever, either to do any thing that is forbidden, or to leave undone any thing that is commanded. 11 Irenseus also speaking of our Saviour’s exposition of the law, Matt, v., saith, P u For all these things do not contain any contrariety or dissolution of the ancient moral laws, as they that hold with Marcion talk, but their fulness and mf/ Ori 7ravTa\ov tov avTov ctkottov e'xeTcu 6 K vpios, TrpoXap(3ava>v apap- TTjpaToov ra dnoTeXecrpaTa, kcil Ik rrjs Trpd)Tr)<: cipxrjs eKTepvcov rrjv Trovrjpiav’ a )S yap 6 pev naXaios eXeye vopos ov poix^bcreis, 6 be K vpios ovde emOv- pqcreis’ KaKeivos pev ov (frovevcreis, 6 be to. TeXeiorepa vopoOeTcov ovde op - yurdrjcrr)’ ovtcos drj Ka\ cvravda 6 pev apKclraL rfj evopKia, 6 de rr/s emopKias rrjv acf)oppr]v diaK07TTei. Basil, in Psa. 14 - [P- 133 - vol. 10 11 'Otl ov del vopi^eiv eir\ KaraXvcrei rov vopov Kat T 03 V 7 rpo(f)r)Tdn> tov Kvpiov eXrjXvOevai, aXX’ eVi 7 rX^pcoaei ko\ TvpocrSr]Kp rco v TeXeiorepcov. Id. Moral, reg. 42. [vol. II.] 0 'Eneidr] de toov ev rjpiv crTpecfiope- vcov TTpaypciTcuv ra pev ecrTiv vno rqs evToXrj r tov Qeov ev tt} ay la ypatpfj diecTTaXpeva, ra be crecnciiTrqpeva’ 7 rep\ pev tcov yeypappevoov ovbepia e^ovcria dedorai KadoXov ovdevi, ovre noirjcrai tl tu>v KeKcoXvpeveov, ovTe 7 rapaXel\f/ai ti tcov irpocrTeTaypevoov. Id. Reg. brevior. interrog. 1. [vol. II.] p Omnia enim haec non contrarie- tatem et dissolutionem praeteritorum continent, sicut qui a Marcione sunt vociferantur; sed plenitudinem et extensionem, sicut ipse ait. Nisi abundaverit justitia vestra plusquam Scribarum et Pharisceorum, non in- trabitis in regnum ccelorum. [Iren, adv. hseres. 1 . IV. c. 13. 1.] VII. Of the Old Testament. 241 extension, as himself saith, Unless your righteousness exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees , you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven I shall trouble no more of the Fathers in so clear and undoubted a truth, but only St. Augustine: “For if we 9 distinguish betwixt the two Testaments, the Old and the New, the sacraments are not the same, nor the promises the same, but the precepts are for the most part the same. For, Thou shalt not kill , Thou shalt not commit adultery , Thou shalt not steal , Honour thy father and thy mother , Do not bear false witness , Do not covet thy neighbour's goods , Do not covet thy neighbour's wife , are commands which are laid also upon us, and whosoever doth not observe them erreth."" And Gregorius Neocsesariensis, or Thaumaturgus, who tells us, r “ God the Lord and beholder of all things is to be feared in the first place, and his commands are to be observed ; and let every one be fully persuaded that all things must hereafter be brought to judgment, and every one shall receive according to the merit of their works, whether they be good or evil."" Concluding this as Olympiodorus doth his comment Upon Ecclesiastes: “ But now s we being so well taught by the Preacher, let us fear God and keep his commandments with all our diligence and study: for all our salvation is laid up in the mercies of the Lord, and the clemency of the Judge, with whom, and by whom , to God the Father and Holy Spirit , be glory now and for evermore. Amen."" q Si enim discernirrms duo Testa- menta, vetus et novum, non sunt eadem sacramenta, nec eadem pro- missa, eadem tamen pleraque prae- cepta. Nam, non occides, non moechaberis, non furaberis, honora patrem et matrenq non falsum testi¬ monium dixeris, non concupisces rem proximi tui, non concupisces uxorem proximi tui, et nobis prae- ceptum est: et quisquis ea non observaverit deviat. Aug. in Psa. 73. [2. vol. IV.] r Timendus ante omnia Deus om¬ nium Dominus simul et inspector : observanda item mandata ipsius, et persuasum habeat unusquisque om- BEVERIDGE. nia postbaec judicanda, et singulos juxta merita operum sive bona sive mala retributionem accepturos. Gregor. Neocaes. in Eccles. [apud Bibl. Max. Patr. p. 326. vol. IIP] s Nos autem bene jam per Eccle- siasten edocti timeamus Deum, et illius mandata custodiamus, omni nostra contentione et studio : summa enim salutis nostrae in misericordiis Domini ac benignitate judicis re- posita est; cum quo et per quem Deo Patri est gloria, Sanctoque Spiritui et nunc et in secula seculorum. Amen. Olympiodor. in Eccles. fin. [Ibid. p. 519. vol. XVIII.] R ARTICLE VIII. OF THE THREE CREEDS. The Three Creeds , Nice Creed , Athanasius’s Creed , and that which is commonly called the Apostles’ Creed , ought throughly to be received and believed; for they may be proved by most certain warrants of holy scripture . O UR Saviour immediately before his ascension commanded baptism to be administered in the name of the Father , Son , and Holy Ghost , Matt, xxviii. 19; his church a hath there¬ fore in all ages required the profession of faith in these three Persons of all that were to be baptized : and therefore, to prepare her catechumeni for baptism, she hath still instructed them in what they ought to believe concerning each Person, which when they had learned, acknowledged, and professed, either by themselves or their sureties, they were presently received by baptism into the church of Christ. Now for the better understanding of what they were bound thus to acknowledge, the church used still to give them, in plain and familiar terms, a brief but full explication and a That the ancients made this place the ground of their creeds, we may see in Eusebius, who, having presented his creed to the council of Nice, after he had rehearsed it, adds, Kada)? kcu 6 Kvpios rjpoov ano- crreWcov els to Krjpvypa tovs eavrov paOr^raselne’ rmpevOevres paSrjTevo-are iravra ra edvrj, &c. Socrat. Hist. Eccl. 1 . I. ne(p. \j). p. 23. vol. II.] And so Arius and Euzoius having delivered their creed to Constantine, they add, Tavrrpi tie rr)v nlartv nap- eikrityapev e< toov dyicav 'Evayye\ioiv , Xeyovros tov K vplov rols eavrov pa- Brjrals, ivopevOevres padrjTevo-are, &c. Ibid. Ke(f>. /cf. Gr. c. 19. Lat. And so St. Basil, after he had set down his confession of faith or creed, adds, Ovtoos ( ppovovpev, Kal ovtoos /Scotti- Copev els Tpia8a opoovaLov Kara rrjv evToXyv avrov tov K vplov rjpcov T rjcrov Xpio-rov eltrovTos, nopevSevres padrj- revaare ndvTa ra edvt], ^anrl^ovres avrovs els to dvopa tov Uarpos, k at tov Ytov, #cai tov 'A yiov ILvevparos. Basil, de vera fide. [p. 390. vol. II.] Art. VIII. Of the Three Creeds. 243 description of every Person in whose names they were to be baptized; which explication or description of the Persons in the Holy Trinity was afterwards called the b symbol , creed, or rule of faith , because it contained whatsoever was necessary to be believed and acknowledged in order to baptism. Now the church of Christ being scattered abroad into several nations and countries much distant one from another, and yet each particular church still retaining the same way of fitting her catechumeni and c competentes for baptism, though they all agreed in setting down the three Persons themselves in their Creeds, yet they differed something in the explication of them; some giving it in more, others in fewer terms, but still retaining the same order, first setting down the Father, then the Son, and then the Holy Ghost. And hence it is that there have been so many creeds composed since our Saviour's time, all differing in some circumstances, though all agreeing in the substance, viz. We believe in the Father , Son, and Holy Ghost , which is the sum and substance of them all. b So called, as some of old thought, from the Greek word signifying a collation: Quod enim Grsece sym- bolum dicitur Latine collatio nomi- tiatur. Serm. de temp. [241. Aug. p. 395. Append. Vol. V.] Symbolum Grsece collatio, hoc est quod plures in unum conferunt. Rab. Maur. de instit. cler. 1 . 2. c. 56. [vol. VI.] v. et Eucher. de symb. homil. 1. But these, and others, it seemed, not so well skilled in the Greek language, confounded o-vpftoXov with crvpfSoXr]. For it is av/x^oXi 7 , not crvfxfioXov, that signifies a collation. So Athenaeus saith, (rvfJifioXriv TTjv els tci crvfX7ro(rla V7TO tg)V nivovToiv elacfiepofxevriv. Con- viv. Soph. 1 . 8. [68. vol. III.] But crvpftoXov signifies tessera , signacu- lumj and so other of the Fathers expounded it, and that most rightly; Symbolum tessera est et signaculum, quo inter fideles perfidosque secerni- tur. Max. Taurin. de trad. symb. [p. 239. Hept. prses.] Symbolum cordis signaculum, et nostrse militise sacramentum. Ambros. de veland. virg. 1 . 3. [4. 20.] This Petrus .Chrysologus hath also respect to, when he saith, Accepturi ergo sym¬ bolum, hoc est pactum vitse, salutis placitum, et inter vos et Deum fidei insolubile vinculum, pectora parate non chartam. Chrysol. Serm. 58. [Hept. Prses.] c Post catechumenos secundus competentium gradus est. Com¬ petentes autem sunt qui jam post doctrinam fidei ad gratiam Christi percipiendam festinant. Ideoque ap- pellantur competentes, i. e. gratiam Christi petentes. Nam catechumeni tantum audiunt nec dum petunt. Sunt enim quasi hospites et vicini fidelium de foris audiunt mysteria, audiunt gratiam, sed adhuc non ap- pellantur fideles. Competentes au¬ tem jam petunt, jam accipiunt, jam catechizantur, id est imbuuntur in- structione sacramentorum : istis enim quasi salutare symbolum tra- ditur, quasi communicatorium fidei, et sanctse confessionis indicium, quo instructi agnoscant quales jam ad gratiam Christi exhibere se debent. Isidor. Hispal. Eccles. offic. 1 . 2. c. [21.] R 2 244 Art, Of the Three Creeds. Now of all the creeds that were ever made, those that have been of the most esteem and greatest authority in the church of Christ are the Nicene Creed, Athanasius’s Creed, and the creed which is commonly called the Apostles’ Creed; of which three creeds this article treats, and asserts them to be all agreeable to the word of God, and may be proved from it. And each of these creeds, by the assistance of the Holy Trinity they speak of, I shall endeavour to give some light unto. And I think I need not do any thing more to prove them agreeable to the word of God, than to discover what they are; for he that doth but know that cannot but ac¬ knowledge the other. Of every one of them therefore in their order. And first of the Nice or Nicene Creed * which that we may rightly understand, we must know that in the fourth century after our Saviour’s incarnation, in the year of our Lord 325, there arising a contention in the church concerning the keep¬ ing of Easter, as also concerning the divinity of Christ, which Arius the heretic did most blasphemously oppose; other means failing, it pleased the most high God to put it into the heart of that pious and renowned emperor Constantine the Great, for the Composing the contention about Easter, and the suppressing the heresy of Arius, by letters to call together all the bishops of the Christian world to meet at Nice, a city of Bithynia; which was the first general, and therefore the most famous council that ever was celebrated since the apo¬ stles’ time ; for the emperor’s letters were no sooner divulged, but the bishops and ministers of the church of Christ from d all places of the world do with joy e and triumph meet to¬ gether in the place appointed, to the number of 318. Being met, amongst other things they consulted about the settling of one rule of faith over the whole world. For though d Tcov yovv eicKXrjcnav anaacov ai rfjv TLv pconrjv anacrav Aifivrjv re iccu tt)v ' Aaiav enXrjpovv opov s ex (pcoros, 6 pev yctp (Y los) ef)d>s €K epioros yevvrjrcos e^eXapy^e. Justin. Expos, fid. de rect. confess. [9.] i ’AAV avros re npcbros 6 deo0i\e- erraTos fjpd>v fiacriXevs opdorara Trept- e^etv avrrjv epaprvpr]crev, ovtco re Kal eavrbv (ppovelv ervveopoXoyrjae' Kal TavTfl Toys Travras avyKararldeadai, V7roypacj)eiv re rols boypacn Ka\ ervp- (ppovelv tovtols avrols 7 rapeKeXevero. Theodoret. Hist. Eccles. [Ibid. p. 554 ;] ’E77i Kal raj v Tvcikaiaiv revets Xo- yiovs Kal euLeftavels imerKOTVOvs Kal crvyypacfteas eyvcopev eV't rr/s tov Ila- rpos Kal Y lov OeoXoylas raj tov opoov- (tlov ervy^p-qaapevovs ovopart. Eu- seb. apud Socrat. Hist, eccles. 1 . 1. c. [ 8.1 et Theodor. Hist. 1 . i.c. [11.] /%( / y e *■» c / Ul 06 € 7 TL(TK 07 r 0 i 0 V)( CCIVTOLS €VpOVT€S rds Xej-eis d\X eK narepeov fyovres rrjv paprvplav ovreps eypayfrav' enierKorroi yap dpxeftot npb ercov iyyvs eKarov TpiaKovra rrjs peyaXrjs ‘P eopqs Kal tt)s qperepas noXecos ypaefiovres qTiaerav-r TO TOVS 7TOLTjp,a Xeyovras tov Y lov Kal pq opoovenov roi Uarpi. Athanas. Epist. ad episc, Afric. [6. p. 896. vol. I.] And then presently he saith, that Eusebius himself acknowledg- eth as much, citing the words of Eusebius we quoted before him, only reading deorqros instead of deqXoyias. And one of those whom they intend, that lived 130 years before them, I suppose was Tertullian, who lived near 130 years before this council; for the council was not till an. 325, and he lived an, 200, and asserted the Son to be Filium Dei et Deum dictum ex unitate substantiae. Apol. adv. Gentes. And certainly unius substantiee is the same in Latin that opoovaios is in Greek. VIII. 247 Of the Three Creeds. The Nicene Creed. w We believe k in one God the Father Almighty, the Maker of all things, visible and invisible : and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father, the only begotten, that is, of the substance of the Father; God of God ; Light of Light; very God of very God ; begotten not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made, both that are in heaven and that are upon earth : who for us men and for our salvation descended, was made flesh, and became man : he suffered, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven, and will come again to judge both the quick and the dead : and in the Holy Ghost.” After the creed they immediately added an anathema, which ran thus: 1“ But such as say there was a time when he was not, and before he was begotten he was not, and that he was made of nothing : or such as say the Son of God is of another substance or essence, or convertible, or changeable, such the catholic and apostolic church pronounceth accursed.” This creed, with the anathema annexed to it, the whole council approved and subscribed to, even all the 318 m persons k Ihcrrevopev els eva Qeov Ucirepa navTOKparopa, navToov oparwure k at aoparcov noir)TT]v' Kai els tov evaKvpiov Itjctovv Xpurrov, rov Yiov tov Qeov, yevvrjSevra e< tov TLarpos povoyevr), TovrecTTiv ex tt}s ovcrias tov IIciTpos’ Qeov e< Qeov, (pcos en (pooTos, Qeov o\r)divbv eK Qeov dXrjOivov, yewr/devra ov 7roir)6evra, opoovaiov rw Ilarpb 81 ov ra Tf-avra eyevero, rare ev ra> ov-? paved eyvcoaav re Ka\ ecr - rep^av’ kcu v iv N iKala fiotjdvTcov, Kai x el P OTOVLas T °v /aeX- Xovtos enLcrK.oTTe'iv tou K oavcrTavTivov- noXecos Opdvov, vnoXafidiV re fivvacrdat t rvvdxjsai rfj KaOdXov eKKXrj(rla rovs KaXovp-evovs Manefioviavovs. Sozom. Hist. 1 . 7. c. 7. et Socrat. 1 . 5. c. 8. 0 Kai els to Ilvevp,a to *Ayiov, to KVpLOV K.a\ faoTVOLOV, TO €K TOV UdTpOS eKnopevopevov, to avv Ilarpi Kai YiS crvvTYpou 7Tpo(pr)Tcov' els plav ay lav KadoXucrjv Kai ano- CTToXiKtjv eKKXrjcrlav' opoXoyovpev ev (3d7TTCcrpa els deaiv dpapTicov. 7 Tpoa- fioKoipev avdaTaaLV veKpdtv, Kai farjv tov peXXovTos aloovos. [vid. Epiph. Anchor, cxx.] p This we may easily see from VIII. Of the Three Creeds. 249 find Epiphanius also, who wrote his Anchorate six or seven years before this council, hath in that set down this creed with the same insertions into it wherewith the Constantino- politan council did afterwards confirm it, and saith, it is the faith q delivered by the apostles and the 318 bishops in the Nicene council. Which gives me ground to think, that though the Nicene council did at the first confirm the Creed with no more in it than we have set down, yet that afterwards they did conclude upon other explications of it, which might be inserted into it. And that which confirms me the more in it is, because I find r Athanasius himself saying, that the writings or acts of the Nicene svnod assert, that “ the Son is of the same substance with the Father,” and that “ the Holy Ghost is to be glorified together with the Father and the Son which words are part of the additions that were in the Nicene Creed when the Constantinopolitan council confirmed it. Which makes me think, that were not the Acts of that synod (which he and Gregorius Cgesariensis s speak of) lost, we might find most, if not all of the other additions concluded^upon then, but not inserted into the Creed, because that there was enough already contained in it to oppose all the heresies that were then abetted. But howsoever, whether the Nicene Fathers concluded upon Cyril himself, who, having expound¬ ed the Creed, adds, T av& Tjplv Teas Kal nepl Ttjs alcoviov £o )rjs e’lprjTai avp- pirpcos, TjTLS €(ttl tcov inayyeWopevcov iv tt} nlcrTei to TeXevTalov 8l8aypa kcu reXoy. Cyril. Hier. Catech. 18. [13.] So that even at that time when he expounded the Creed, which was above twenty years be¬ fore the Constantinopolitan council, yet even then, I say, did the Creed end as it did afterwards. q Avttj pev rj 7 tlcttls napedodt] ano tcov ayifov dnoaToXcov Kal iv iKKXrjala tt} ayla noAei ano navTcov opov tcov ayicov imcxKoncov vnep TpLaKoalcov de avvdo^a^eadai. Athanas. Epist. ad fratres orthodoxos. [p. 30. vol. II.] And elsewhere, speaking of the Nicene council, he saith, ’AXX* ovde dnrjXXoTplcoaav to Uvevpa to 'Ay iov ano tov UaTpos Kal to v Y iov, aXXa pdWov avvedo^acrav avro tco JJaTpl Kal tco Ytai iv tt} pia tt}s aylas T pid 8 os niarTei. Id. Epist. ad Jo- vinian. [4.] s Trjv tov Belov ovtcos crvpl 36 Xov nacrrj alpeTiKrj KaKovola ttjv napelcr- 8vcriv dnoKXelovTes avvvfpalvovcriv €K- Oecnv, 81 eKacrTOV prjTov, to nap eKa- ctttjs alpicrecos dvTiKelpevov, Karapyq- cravTes cf)p6vr]pa’ cos nacriv evdrjXov iK tjjs iv T npoeKreOevTi ev N uatia tt)s nicrTcois (rvpf36\(0 na'i ravra. Kai els to TLvevpa to * Ayiov, to Kvpiou, TO ^(OOTTOIOVV, TO €K TOV UaTpOS 6K7TO- pevop.evov, &c. Phot. Tyr. in concil. Synopsi. Nay, and the fourth ge¬ neral council itself at Chalcedon acknowledged that these explications into the Nicene Creed were put in by the 150 Fathers in the Constan¬ tinopolitan council, but adding, ovx a>s tl \el7r0v tois TTpoXcifiovcnv eVeto'd- yovTes aXka irep\ tov ‘Aylov Uvevpa- ros avTwvevvoutv, Kara tcov ttjv civtov beanoTelav aOeTelv Tveipoopevoiv ypa- (fiiKais papTVplais TpavcoaavTes. Evagr. Hist, eccles. 1 . 2. c. 4. v. et Paulin. Aquil. in synod. Forojul. [Concil. vol. IV.] et Marc. Ephes. in synod. Ferrar. [Ibid. vol. IX.] VIII, Of the Three Creeds. 251 insertion into the Creed may upon good grounds be principally ascribed to that council. And though before this council the Nicene Creed did mostly ruu as we have before described, yet after this council it always ran thus: The Nicene Creed enlarged by the council of Constantinople . “ We believe 11 in one Cod the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible : and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of Cod, begot¬ ten of the Father before all worlds, that is, of the substance of the Father, Cod of Cod, Light of Light, very Cod of very Cod, begotten not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made ; who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Chost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man, and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate : he suffer¬ ed, and was buried, and the third day he rose again, according to the scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father, and he shall come again with glory to judge both the quick and dead, whose kingdom shall have no end. And (we believe) in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Civer of life, who proceedeth from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, who spake by the prophets. And (we believe) one catholic u Iharevopev els eva Qeov Uarepa 7ravTOKpa.ropa, TroirjTrjv ovpavov re ko.1 Trjs yrjs, oparcov re ndvroov ml aopd- tcov. Kat els eva Kvpiov ’Irjaovv Xpicrrov tov Ytov tov Qeov tov povo- yevrj, tov eK tov Ilarpos yevvrjBevra irpb navroov tcov alcovcov, rovrecmv, e< ttjs oiHrlas tov Ilarpos, Qeov eK Qeov, cfoc os' eK (ficoros, Qeov dXrjBivov eK Qeov dXrjBivov, yevvrjBevra ov 7roirj- Bevra, opoovcnov rtS Ilarpl, 81 ov ra rrdvra eyevero ra re ev tois ovpavols ml ra ev rrj yfj’ tov 81 fjpas tovs dvBpconovs, ml 8ia rrjv rjperepav aco- rrjplav mreXBdvTa eK tcov ovpavcov, ml arapKcoBevra eK Hvevparos *Aylov ml Map las Ttjs napBevov ml evavBpco~ 7rrjaavTa, crTavpcoBevra re vTrep rjpcbv enl HovtIov IltXarou, ml rraBovra, ml racfoevra, ml dvaardvra Trj rplrr] rfpepa Kara ras ypaefras, ml aveXBovra els tovs ovpavovs, mi mBe^opevov ev 8e£ia tov Ilarpos, ml 7 raXcv ep^opevov pera 8o£ijs Kplvai £covras ml veKpovs, ov ttjs ftaTr)piov tovto tt/s deias \apLTOs crvp[3o\ov. Evagr. Hist, eccles. 1 . 2. c. 4. Y. et c. 18. where we may see the Fathers of the fourth general council at Chalcedon confirming the same too. This Creed was also confirmed by the council at Sardica. v. Zonar. in concil. Constant. I. can. V. [apud Bever. Synodic, vol. I. p. 92.] f To ayiov avp(3o\ov iv co navres i^aTVTicr&Tjpev i^eLpwvrjaev f] iv Ni¬ geria crvv 'Ayio) Yi.vevp.aTL avvobos, Kal eKvpooaev r) iv K(ovarTavTLVOv7r6\ei tcov ayicov naTepcov (rvveXevcris, Kal i(3e- ftaLcocrev f] iv ’E^ecrco ayia avvobos, Kal i7recr(ppdyLaev opoLws f] iv XaX- KrjftovL peyakr) ayia crvvoSos. Act. V. concil. Constantinop. sub Menna. [Concil. vol. II. p. 1340.] v. et Concil. Emerit. can. 1. [vol. III. p. 999 -] g Suscepimus sanctas et univer- sales quinque synodos beatorum et Deo acceptabilium Patrum, id est qui in Nicsea congregati fuerunt 318. contra Arrium impiissimum et ejusdem dogmata; et in Constanti- nopoli 150 contra vesaniam Mace- donii et Eudoxii et eorum dogmata; et in Epheso primo 200 contra ne- quissimum Nestorium et ejusdem dogmata; et in Chalcedone 630. con¬ tra Eutychen et Nestorium et eorum dogmata; et iterum in Constantino- poli.quinto congregati sunt concilio in tempore Justiniani junioris contra Theodorum et Theodoritum, et eo¬ rum dogmata contra Cyrillum. Con¬ cil. Anglican, apud Bed. hist. Angl. 1. 4. c. 17. b 'ifchti: ^orc: n<£ ?+: ‘iTvtu: tfp/h: A°9 I'E: (DMXW : A.AP 0 ? •*: ©A-Aod/to; a vc+: /wm: i©e 4 .? CP*: ©ftroYrti: <£A<4A: 'Vn-n: ©^©e <\cp-K*: 256 Of the Three Creeds. Art. plain, and true way, and do not turn aside either to the right hand or to the left from the true doctrine of our Fathers, the twelve apostles, and of Paul the fountain of wisdom, and of the seventy-two disciples, and of the 318 orthodox (Fathers) that were gathered together at Nice, and of the 150 at Con¬ stantinople, and the 200 at Ephesus. 1 '’ So that if there be any, this doctrine contained in this Creed must needs be the catholic doctrine of the church of Christ. And hence it is that Epiphanius, speaking of this Creed, saith, ’ “ Do not ye cease, 0 faithful and orthodox men, to preserve this the holy faith of the catholic church, as the holy and only virgin of Cod (the church) hath received it from the holy apostles of the Lord, and so to bring your catechumens for the future to the holy baptism. 11 With this agrees that of St. Basil; k “ Both such as have been prepossessed with another confession of faith, and now are willing to be brought over to the unity of the orthodox, and such also as desire now to be instructed in the word of truth, it is necessary they should be taught the faith that was written by the holy Fa¬ thers in the council that was gathered together at Nice. 11 And hence it is also, that about an. Dom. 512, 1 u Timothy, patriarch of Constantinople, being desired by his friends, (as Theodorus Lector relates,) took care that the Nicene Creed should be read every time that the Lord's Supper was admin- (DTPKDX CWi: r+: ovfp: ©P: ©v: nf-hTi'H.P: ©e: p nA.s avrov prj be^opivov to crvpftoXov, mra£ tov ctovs Xcyopcvov npoTcpov iv ttj ayia TcapacrKcvf) tov Sclov tvclOovs Tco Kaipco tcov yivopivcov VITO TOV i?T ICT KQTTOV KaTTj^rjaCCOV. Theod. Lect. collect. 2. [31, 32. vol. III. Scriptt. hist, eccl.] VIII. Of the Three Creeds. 257 ministered, for the reproof of Macedonius that did not receive this symbol; which before was read only once a year, upon the holy eve of the Lord's passion, at the time when the bishop catechised." And ever since that time hath that, and the other Greek churches in the East, as well as our Latin ones in the West, used still to read this Creed at the Communion or Lord's Supper; so that ours is not the first nor the only church that hath commanded it to be read at that time. And what I have spoken of this Nicene Creed may be applied also to both the other, there being nothing in either of them but what is virtually, if not expressly, contained in this; so that they that receive this cannot deny them. And therefore, having spoken so much to this, I need speak but little concerning the other, besides the discovery of what those other creeds are, that this article saith ought to be received. And the next in order is Athanasius's Creed, so called from one Athanasius, once bishop of Alexandria, so famous for his opposing the Arian heresy in the time of the Nicene council who was the supposed author of this Creed. Athanasius's Creed. m “ Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is neces¬ sary that he hold the catholic faith. Which faith except every m Quicunque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est ut teneat ca- tholicam fidem; quam nisi quisque integram inviolatamque servaverit absque dubio in aeternum peribit. Fides autem catholica haec est, ut unum Deum in Trinitate, et Trini- tatem in Unitate veneremur, neque confundentes personas, neque sub- stantiam separantes. Alia enim est persona Patris, alia Filii, alia Spiri- tus Sancti: sed Patris Filii et Spi- ritus S. una est divinitas, sequalis gloria, et coseterna majestas. Qua- lis Pater tabs Filius, tabs Spiritus Sanctus. Increatus Pater, increatus Filius, increatus Spiritus Sanctus; immensus Pater, immensus Filius, immensus Spiritus Sanctus. diter- nus Pater, seternus Filius, seternus Spiritus S. Et tamen non tres se- BEVERIDGE. terni sed unus seternus: sicut nec tres increati, nec tres immensi, sed unus increatus, unus immensus. Si¬ militer omnipotens Pater, omnipo- tens Filius, omnipotens Spiritus Sanctus; et tamen non tres omni- potentes sed unus omnipotens. Ita Deus Pater, Deus Filius, Deus Spi¬ ritus Sanctus; et tamen non tres Dii, sed unus est Deus. Ita Domi- nus Pater, Dominus Filius, Domi- nus Spiritus Sanctus ; et tamen non tres Domini sed unus est Dominus. Quia sicut singillatim unamquam- que personam Deum aut Dominum confiteri Christiana veritate compel- limur, ita tres Deos aut Dominos dicere catholica religione prohibe- mur. Pater a nullo factus, nec cre- atus nec genitus est. Filius a Patre solo est, non factus, nec creatus, sed S 258 Of the Three Creeds. Art. one do keep wholly and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this, That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the Persons nor dividing the substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one, the glory equal, the majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreate, the Son un¬ create, the Holy Ghost uncreate. The Father incomprehen¬ sible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost incom¬ prehensible. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three eternals but one eternal. As also there are not three incomprehensibles, nor three uncreated, but one uncreated, and one incompre¬ hensible. So likewise the Father is Almighty, the Son Al¬ mighty, and the Holy Ghost Almighty; and yet they are not three Almighties but one Almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God; and yet they are not three Gods but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son is Lord, and the Holy Ghost is Lord; and yet they are not three Lords but one Lord. For like as we are genitus. Spiritus Sanctus a Patre et Filio, non factus, nec creatus, nec genitus est, sed procedens. Unus ergo Pater non tres Patres, unus Filius non tres Filii, unus Spiritus Sanctus non tres Spiritus Sancti. Et in hac Trinitate nihil prius aut posterius, nihil majus aut minus, sed totae tres personae coaeternae sibi sunt et coaequales. Ita ut per omnia, sicut jam supra dictum est, et uni- tas in Trinitate et Trinitas in unitate veneranda sit. Q,ui vult ergo salvus esse ita de Trinitate sentiat. Sed necessarium est ad aeternam salutem ut incarnationem quoque Domini nostri Jesu Christi fideliter credat. Est ergo tides recta ut credamus et confiteamur quia Dominus noster Jesus Christus Dei Filius, Deus et homo est. Deus est ex substantia Patris ante secula genitus, homo ex substantia matris in seculo natus; perfectus Deus, perfectus homo, ex anima rationali et humana carne sub- sistens. iEqualis Patri secundum divinitatem, minor Patre secundum humanitatem. Qui licet Deus sit et homo, non duo tamen sed unus est Christus. Unus autem non conver¬ sion divinitatis in carnem, sed as¬ sumption humanitatis in Deum. Unus omnino non confusione sub¬ stantiae, sed unitate personae. Nam sicut anima rationalis et caro unus est homo, ita Deus et homo unus est Christus. Qui passus est pro sa¬ lute nostra; descendit ad inferos : tertia die resurrexit a mortuis: as- cendit ad ccelos; sedet ad dexteram Dei Patris omnipotentis; inde ven- turus est judicare vivos et mortuos; ad cujus adventum omnes homines resurgent cum corporibus suis, et reddituri sunt de factis propriis ra*- tionem; et qui bona egerunt ibunt VIII. Of the Three Creeds . 259 compelled by Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord; so are we forbidden by the catholic religion to say there be three Gods or three Lords. The Father is made of none, neither created nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone, not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and the Son, neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding. So that there is one Father not three Fathers, one Son not three Sons, one Holy Ghost not three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is afore or after another, none is greater or less than another; but the whole three Persons are coeternal together and coequal. So that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be wor¬ shipped. He therefore that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity. Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting sal¬ vation that he also believe rightly the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right faith is, that we believe and con¬ fess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and man; God of the substance of the Father begotten before the worlds; and man of the substance of his mother born in the world; perfect God and perfect man, of an human soul and flesh subsisting; equal to the Father as touching his Godhead, inferior to the Father as touching his manhood; in vitam Eeternam, qui vero mala in ignem eeternum. Haec est fides catholica, quam nisi quis fideliter firmeque crediderit salvus esse non poterit. Symbol. Athan. [vol. II. p. 728.] This Creed I have here set down in Latin, because the Greek copies of it differ much from one another, but all agree with the Latin, but only in the article of the procession of the Spirit. For where¬ as it is here said, Spiritus Sanctus a Patre et Filio non factus, nec cre- atus, nec genitus est, sed procedens, I have one Greek copy hath it, to Uvevfxa to 'Ayiov airo rov Uarpos iariv ov TroirjTov, ov ktkttov, ov yev- vtjtov, aXX’ eKnopevTov; another, to Tlpevpa to * Ay lov ano rov Ilarpos ov TVfTTovqpevov, ovtc bebrjpLOvpyr/pevov, ovtc yeyevvrjpevov, dXX’ eWopevToi/. So that as they both differ in Greek from one another, so from the Latin • too in having no more than a.7vo rov II aTpbs, when the Latin hath A Patre et Filio. And the Greek co¬ pies thus differing from one another, and the Latin still remaining the same, it may give us some ground to think that it was first made in Latin, and the Greek copies various¬ ly translated from that. And this we find was the opinion of Gregory the Ninth’s aivoKpunapioi, or legates, that he sent to Constantinople, to reconcile the Greeks to the Latins, an. [1233.], viz. Haymo Rodolphus, Petrus and Hugo, who then said. Unde sanctus Athanasius dum in partibus occidentalibus exulabat, in expositione fidei quam Latinis ver¬ bis reddidit, sic ait. Pater a nullo est factus, &c. Abrah. Bzov. Eccles. annal. tom. XIII. ad an. [1233.] s 2 Art. 260 Of the Three Creeds. who though he be God and man yet he is not two but one Christ; one not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking of the manhood into God ; one altogether, not by confusion of substance but by unity of Person: for as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and man is one Christ; who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again the third day from the dead. He ascended into heaven; he sitteth on the right of the Father God Almighty, from whence he shall come to judge both the quick and the dead. At whose coming 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. This is the catholic faith, which except a man believe faithfully he can never be saved.” This incomparable Creed, some think Anastasius 0 , others Eusebius VercellensisP, others that some learned Frenchman q made it; but the most and the ancientest ascribe it to Atha¬ nasius. And truly though we cannot produce any certain argument from whence to prove it, yet this we know, there is nothing in it (especially in the Greek copies) but what is consonant to his other works; and that it hath been received in the church for above this four hundred r , six hundred s , yea, for above this eight hundred years together. For Hincmarus, that lived an. Dom. 850, commands his presbyters, ta That every one would commit to his memory the words of Atha- ° Licet plerique eum Anastasium essefalsoarbitrantur. Johan. Beleth. Sum. divin. offic. c. [40.] p Symbolum illud cui nomen Quicunque vult, ab Atbanasio ut nonnulli arbitrantur conscriptum, ut alii ab Eusebio Vercellensi. duel, adv. Harding, par. 2. c. 1. Q Magni Athanasii symbolum, quamvis Treveris, ut plerique tradi- derunt, id est in Gallia, a theologo tamen inter illos doctissimo acutis- simoque seriptum. Pithceus de Proces. Spirit. S. [p. 25.] r Secundum symbolum Quicunque vult salvus esse, See. ab Atbanasio patriarcha in civitate Treveri compo- situm. Gul. Duranti episcopus Mi- nacensis in Rational, divin. 1 . 4. c. 25. s For so vve find Abbo Floria- censis monasterii abbas, that lived an. Dom. 970, saying. Alii enim di- cunt, ut arbitror secundum Athana- sium, Spiritus Sanctus a Patre et Filio non factus, nec creatus, sed procedens. Apol. ad Reg. Franc. t Ut sermonem Athanasii de fide, cujus initium est, Quicunque vult salvus esse, memorise quisque com- mendet, et sensum illius intelligat, et verbis communibus enunciare queat. Hincmar. Archiep. Rlie- mens. in tom. III. Concil. a Sir- mond. edit, in append, [p. 618.] VIII. Of the Three Creeds. 261 nasius concerning faith, the beginning whereof is, ‘ Whoso¬ ever will be saved," and understand the sense of it, and so be able to pronounce it in common words."" But howsoever, whether Athanasius be the author of it or no, be sure the Creed before rehearsed is the Creed that goes under his name, and by consequence that which we are to un¬ derstand in this article by Athanasius"s Creed, it going under that name as in others, so in our liturgy in particular. And it containing nothing but what is somewhere or other in these Articles proved from scripture, reason, and Fathers, the doc¬ trine of it must needs be received as true, and consonant to the word of God. The next is that which is commonly called “ The Apostles" Creed,"" which, as every one knows, runs thus: The Apostles’ Creed. “ I believe in God u the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth : and in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried: he descended into hell; the third day he rose again from the dead, and ascended into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty: from thence he shall come to judge both the quick and the dead. I believe in the Holy Ghost, the holy catholic church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the flesh, and the life everlasting. Amen."" Of this Creed it is here said that it is commonly called “ the Apostles" Creed;"" and so indeed it is ; and that not only at this time and in this place, but it was so called by several of the Fathers themselves, who avouched the apostles them¬ selves for its composers. For so saith St. Ambrose; “For u nicrrevo) els tov Qeov Uarepa TravTOK.pa.Topa TroirjTTjv ovpavov KaX yr)s, KaX ’Irjcrovv X.piaTOv Y iov avTov tov povoyevr) tov Kvpiov rjpcov' tov (rv\\r)(f)6evTa e< UvevpaTOS 'Aylov, yewr/devra e< M aplas Trjs TrapSevov, rraOovTa enX UovtIov IliXaroi;, errau- peodevTa, Oavovra, koi TacfievTa, Ka- Te\6ovTa els abov, 777 TpLTjj rjpepa avaaTavTa ai to tco v veKpcov, aveXdovra els tovs ovpavovs, Kade^opevov ev be£ia Qeov JJarpos rravTobvvapov, eKelOev ep-^op-evov Kplvai £a>VTas KaX ve7rov. Clem. Constitut. 2. c. 18. [p. 226. vol. I.] ’E7m7rep ov8e\s, ws rd Adyta (prjcr'i , Kadapos arro pvnov. Dio- nys. Areop. Eccles. hier. c. 7. [p. 414. vol. I.] Vid. Art. xv. by them MS. to them ed. 1716. IX. Of Original or Birth Sin. 267 so that the flesh lusteth contrary to the spirit , and therefore in every person horn into this world it deserveth wrath and damna¬ tion. For in that it is a fault, it must needs transgress God’s precepts; and in that it transgresseth his precepts, it must needs incense his person, and so deserve wrath and damna¬ tion, and therefore damnation because wrath. For it is the wrath of God that is the damnation and torment of a soul in hell; as his love is the salvation and glory of a saint in heaven. And this infection of nature doth remain , yea in them that are regenerated. So that though grace in this life may take away the strength, it cannot take away the life of sin. But though a saint may not live in sin, still sin will live in him. His strong sins may every day grow weaker and weaker, and his weak graces may every day grow stronger and stronger; but his weak graces will never be perfectly strengthened 0 , nor his strong sins perfectly weakened, so long as he is in this life. So that though there shall be no con¬ demnation to them hereafter, yet there are corruptions in them here; the apostle himself confessing lust and concu¬ piscence to be a sin, which no saint but will himself confess to be in him. The sum of all which is this: Adam’s sin is imputed to us, and we are infected with it, and that not only before, but after we are born again, even so long as in this life. All which I shall briefly prove from scripture, reason, and Fathers. First, the scriptures do plainly shew that Adam’s sin is our guilt as well as his, and that we did as really sin in him as we proceed from him. For so saith the apostle; Wherefore as by one mail sin entered into the world , and death by sin ; and' so death passed upon all men , for that all have sinned. Rom. v. 12. Where we see the apostle saying, All have sinned before all were born, which could not be unless they had before sinned in him from whom they were born. And so many render the words, d In whom all have sinned; and therefore c Charitas in aliis major, in aliis d In the Greek it is, ’E0’ a> navres minor, in aliis nulla est; plenissima, rjpapTov. Vulg. In quo omnes pec- quae jam non potest augeri, quam- caverunt. Whence St. Austin, De diu hie homo vivit, est in nemine. illis quoque apostolicis verbis in August. Epist. [167. 15. vol. II.] ad quibus impudentia mirabili imo de¬ llieronym. mentia resistitis fundatissimae fidei, 268 Of Original or Birth Sin. Art. the same apostle tells us, In Adam all died , 1 Cor. xv. 22. Now how could all die in him, unless all sinned in him? For death is the wages of sin only, as well as the only wages of sin. And that we are not only guilty of this sin, but also defiled with it, the Psalmist is plain, saying, e Behold I was shapen in iniquity , and in sin did my mother conceive me , Psalm li. 5. So that sin was in his heart whilst he was in his mother’s womb; for seeing he was conceived in sin, sin must needs be conceived in him: and the apostle, that we were by nature the children of wrath , even as others , Eph. ii. 3 ; and how can we be the children of wrath, unless we be first the parents of sin ? Certainly there can be no other way that we can be by nature subject to wrath, the wages of sin, but because we are by nature subject to those sins that deserve this wrath. And so our Saviour tells us, that which is born of the flesh is flesh , John iii. 6 : that which is born of flesh cor¬ rupted with sin must needs be itself flesh corrupted with sin. And that this infection remains even after regeneration the apostle asserts in saying, If we say we have no sin, ice deceive ourselves , and the truth is not in us , 1 John i. 8. So that for any man to say he hath no sin, he commits sin in saying so, for in plain terms he lies. And therefore David saith, Enter ubi ait, per unum hominem peccatum intravit in mundum, et per peccatum mors, et ita in omnes homines per- transiit in quo omnes peccaverunt, frustra sensum alium novum atque distortum et a vero abhorrentem moliris exculpere; affirmans ea lo- cutione dictum esse in quo omnes peccaverunt, ac si diceretur propter quod omnes peccaverunt; sicut dic¬ tum est in quo corriyit junior vitam suamj ut viz. non in uno homine omnes homines peccasse intelligan- tur originaliter, &c. Non ergo huic sensui convenit ilia locutio, ita dic¬ tum esse in quo velut dictum esset propter quod. Aug. contra Julian. Pelag. 1 . 6. [75. vol. X.] And the Ethiopic translation gives us the clear exposition of the words, For as by the iniquity of one man sin entered into the world, and by that sin death came upon all men j Ahdpev tolvvv evOeoos rv’ ual avre^ovaiop, oOev sal ra aXoya ovk eladv avre£ov(ria’ dyovrai yap puXXop vi to rrjs (pvaecos fjnep ayov(TL. Ibid; d Ex quo enim primus homo na- turam suam voluntarie vitiavit, at- que oppressit infirmitas, nisi divinae gratiae medicamento praeventum in unoquoque homine sanetur atque adjuvetur liberum indesinentur arbi¬ trium. Est quidem liberum non tamen bonum ; est liberum non ta- men sanum; est liberum non tamen justum. Et quanto magis a bonitate, rectitudine, sanitate, justitiaque libe¬ rum, tanto magis malitiae, perversi- tatis, infirmitatis atque iniquitatis mortifera servitute captivum. Ful¬ gent. de incarn. et grat. Christi, [38.] V. et Cassiodor. in Psal. cxvii. e Nam quod surgere anima per se jam non potest quse per se cadere potuit, voluntas in causa est, quse corrupti corporis vitiato et vitioso amore languescens, et jacens, amo- rem pariter justitiae non admittit. Bernard, super Cantica, serm. 81. T 0 n 6 Art. Of Freewill. not excuse the will, as the will doth not exclude the necessity ; for indeed it is a willing necessity. As the angels necessarily love God, and yet they love him willingly ; so man willingly loves sin, and yet he loves it necessarily, not from any exter¬ nal but an internal necessity, not forced by others, but allured by himself; his own will being so taken with sin that he cannot but take delight in it, and so averse from holiness that he cannot turn to it. And this is that which is here said, The condition of man after the fall of Adam is such , that he cannot turn and prepare himself \ by his own natural strength and good works , to faith , and calling upon God ; he cannot repent, he cannot believe, he cannot turn to God, nay, he cannot so much as prepare him¬ self for it; and why cannot he, but because he will not ? And certainly if he will not, he cannot; it being impossible he should act any such thing contrary to his will: and therefore if he cannot will it, he cannot do it. Wherefore we have no power to do good works pleasant and acceptable to God, without the grace of God by Christ f pre¬ venting us , that we may have a good will , and working with us, when we have it. In order to the doing of good it is not only necessary the grace of God should turn our wills to it, but assist our wills in it; it is not only necessary that f Of God’s preventing us with his grace the Fathers often speak. Qui praevenit nolentem ut velit, subse- quitur volentem ne frustra velit. Aug. Quis nostrum dicit consentire proprium esse voluntatis, hoc est, ex propriis viribus ? Non hoc dicimus, sed consentire ad voluntatem per- tinere docemus, postquam praeventa est a Domino et sic accepit consen- tiendi potestatem. Id. de grat. et lib. arbit. c. n. Ipsum inquit velle credere aut converti non potest homo habere, nisi per gratiam praevenien- tem acceperit ut posset. Ibid. c. 15. Bonum propositum quidem adjuvat subsequens gratia, sed nec ipsum esset nisi praecederet gratia. Id. contra duas epist. Pelag. 1 . 2. [22. vol. X.] Ad has (sacras scripturas) si humilis et mitis accesseris, ibi profecto invenies et praevenientem gratiam qua potest elisus surgere, et comitantem qua viam recti queat itineris currere, et subsequentem qua valeat ad regni ccelestis beatitudinem pervenire. Fulgent. Epist. [VI. 12.] ad Theodor, de conversione. Prae- venit igitur gratia impium ut fiat justus; subsequitur justum ne fiat impius : praevenit caecum ut lumen quod non invenit donet; subsequi¬ tur videntem ut lumen quod contu- lit servet: praevenit elisum ut sur- gat; subsequitur elevatum ne cadat: praevenit donans homini bonam vo¬ luntatem ; subsequitur benevolen- tem operando in illo boni operis facultatem. Hoc igitur ista miseri- cordia Dei in homine subsequitur quod praeveniens ipsa largitur. Id. de praedestinatione, ad Monimum, 1. 1. [c. 11.] X. Of Freewill. m himself sets us on work, but that himself also worketh with us. Without him we cannot begin a good work, without him we cannot carry it on, and without him too we cannot perfect it. And this is a conclusion that necessarily follows upon the premises. For if we cannot turn ourselves to God, we cannot do any thing that is good without the assistance of God him¬ self, for we cannot do any thing that is good until we are first turned unto God. But of that hereafter. In the meanwhile here it mav suffice to consider, whether it be true indeed that a man cannot turn himself to God, and prepare himself for God, unless he receive grace and power from him. And truly if it hath pleased my glorious Maker to entrust me with any understanding of his holy scriptures, this must needs be the purport and meaning of them; for what else can we understand by these words, No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him , John vi. 44 ? None can come by faith to God the Son, but he that is drawn by the grace of God the Father. Though God doth not drive us to Christ, yet he draws us to him». He doth not drive us against our wills, but he draws us with our wills, making us a willing people in the day of his power , Psalm cx. 3; and until we be thus made willing by the Father we can never come unto the Son, for no man can come to me except the Father draw him. And certainly this was St. Paul's opinion also, when he said, Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves , but our sufficiency is of God , 2 Cor. iii, 5. If we be not sufficient of ourselves to think a good thought, how can we be able without God to act true faith ? Our sufficiency , saith he, is of God ; if we be able to do any thing, it is he that makes us able; if we have any suffi- & Quid hie dicimus fratres ? Si trahimur ad Christum ergo inyiti credimus ? ergo yiolentia adhibe- tur ? non voluntas excitatur ? In- trare quisquam ecclesiam potest no¬ lens, accedere ad altare potest nolens, accipere potest sacramentum no¬ lens, credere non potest nisi vo- lens. Aug. in Joh. tract. 26. [2. vol. III. p. ii.] Noli te cogitare invitum trahi, trahitur animus et amore. Ibid. [4.] Nemo potest ve¬ nire ad me, nisi Pater qui misit me traxerit eum ; non enim ait duxerit, ut illic aliquo modo intelligamus prsecedere voluntatem. Id. contra duas epist. Pelag. 1 . 1. [37. vol. X.] Ei yap tls epX eTai vrpos avrov, (frrjcrl, t'l Set rrjs eX^ecos ; tovto Se ov to €(f> rjpiv avaipei, dXXci he'iKvvcriv rjpds Por/- Oelas dtopevovs" sal alvirTerat evravda ov tov aKovra ep^opevov dXXa tov 7 roXXrjs anoXavovraavppafai. Chry- sost. in Joh. hom. 46. [vol. II. p. 744- 3 1 -] 278 Of Freewill. Art. ciency, it is he that gives it. And therefore also it is that our Saviour saith, He that ahideth in me , and I in him , the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me you can do nothing , John xv. 5. h He doth not say, there are some things you cannot do without me, or there are many things you cannot do without me, but, without me you can do nothing , nothing good, nothing pleasing and acceptable unto God : whereas if we could either prepare ourselves [to turn,] or turn ourselves when prepared, without him, we should do much. And to put it out of doubt, the same Spirit tells us elsewhere, For it is God that worJceth in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure 1 , Philipp, ii. IB. It is he that first enables us to will what we ought to do, and then to do what we will. Both the grace we desire, and k our desire of grace, proceeds from him. Without him we could not have any grace we would, and without him we could not will to have any grace at all. So that I am not only bound to thank him for his bestowing grace upon me, but also for my desiring grace of him : for it is he that worketh in me both to will and to do, both to will and desire, and also to act and exercise grace; or, as it h Ne quisquam putaret saltern parvum aliquem fructum posse a semetipso palmitem ferre, cum haec dixisset, hie fert fructum multum, non ait quod sine me parum potesr tis facere, sed nihil potestis facere : sive ergo parum sive multum, sine illo fieri non potest, sine quo nihil fieri potest. Aug. in Joh. tract. 81. [3. vol. III. p. ii.] 1 Thus the Syriac translation plain¬ ly renders the words, 001 joiA^s >opo 001 <2>| ^cAj] i. e. For God himself stirs up in you both to will, and also to do what you will. As it is he that enables our hearts to will what to act, so it is he that enables our hands to act what we will. k That the very first beginnings and desires of grace are from God, the fathers oft inculcate. Ex lege si ea legitime utamur confugimus ad gjratiam; quis autem confugit nisi cum a Domino gressus viri dirigup- tur ? at per hoc desiderare auxilium gratiae initium est gratiae. Aug. de corrept. et grat. [2. vol. X.] Homi- nis autem proposition bonum adju- vat quidem subsequens gratia, sed nec ipsum esset nisi praecederet gratia. Studium quoque hominis quod dicitur bonum quamvis cum esse coeperit adjuvetur gratia, non tamen incipit sine gratia. Aug. con¬ tra duas epist. Pelag. 1 . 2. [22. vol. X.] Quis istam etsi parvam dare coeperit cliaritatem, nisi ille qui prae- parat voluntatem, et cooperando per- ficit quod operando incipit ? Quo- niam ipse ut velimus operatur inci- piens, qui volentibus cooperatur per- ficiens ; propter quod ait apostolus, Certus sum quoniam qui operatur in vobis opus bonum perficiet usque in diem Christi Jesu. Ut ergo velimus sine nobis operatur; cum autem vo- lumus, et sic volumus ut faciamus, nobiscum cooperatur. Tamen sine illo vel operante ut velimus vel co- operante cum volumus, ad bona pie- X. Of Freewill. 279 is here expressed in this article, it is he that prevents us that we may have a good will , and it is he that worJceth with us when we have that good will. And therefore certainly without him we can neither prepare ourselves for conversion, nor con¬ vert ourselves after preparation, unless we can prepare our¬ selves without having a good will, or convert ourselves without acting of it: for it is he alone that giveth this good will to us, and it is he that acteth this good will in us, without whom we could not desire it before we have it, nor act it when we have it. Neither indeed can I in reason see how man should be able to turn himself from sin to holiness, from evil to good, as considering how he is not of himself able to discern betwixt good and evil, but still takes good for evil, and evil for good, Isa. v. 20, his understanding being so darkened that he can see nothing of God in God, nothing of holiness in holiness, nothing of good in good, nothing of evil in evil, nor any thing of sinfulness in sin. Nay, it is so darkened, that he fancies himself to see good in evil, and evil in good, happiness in sin, and misery in holiness. And therefore the apostle tells us, 1 The tatis opera nihil valeamus. Id. de grat. et lib. arb, [33.] Hnjus gra¬ tiae adjutorium semper est nobis a Deo poscendum, sed ne ipsum quod poscimus nostris viribus assigne- mus : neque enim haberi potest ipse saltern orationis affectus nisi divi- nitus fuerit attributus. Ut ergo de- sideremus adjutorium gratiae, hoc ipsum quoque opus est gratiae. Ipsa namque incipit infundi ut incipiat posci; ipsa quoque amplius infundi- tur cum poscentibus datur. Ful¬ gent. Epist. [6. iq.] ad Theodor. Non enim di.cat meum esse yelle cre¬ dere, Dei autem gratiae est adjuvare, sed dicat gratiae Dei est adjuvare ut sit meum velle credere. Id. de incarnat. et grat. D. N. Jesu Christi. [Epist. 17* 35*3 1 Qcnrep ycip toIs 6(f)daXpols tov- tois ovdeis civ to. iv toIs ovpavois KarapciOoC ovtcos ovde ^v^r] povrj tci tov nvevpaTos. Kai tl Xeyco tci iv toIs ovpavois; ovde tci iv rrj yfj dnavra' Kai yap opoovres nvpyov TroppcaOev rerpaycovov CTTpoyyvXov ri¬ val vopi^opev. "Ectti de ocpOaXpcov d 7 ra.Tr] tci Trjs TOiavTrjs v7roXr]\jsea)s‘ ovtco Toivvv v jrpdypaTa. did Trjs diavoias po- vtjs doKipd^r] tis yeXcos noXvs i\\reTai' ov yap pdvov old 7 rep icrriv avTa ovk d\f/€Tai, dXXa Kai to. ivavTia a>v icrTiv r]yr]aerai, 8idirep iir^yaye, pcopia yap avrco iaTi. Chrysost. in i Corinth, hom. 7. [vol. III. p. 284. 24.] r, 0 ti ovk oidev oti jrvevpaTiKcos avaKpiveTai' tovtccttiv oti nlcTTecos delrai tci Xeyopeva’ Kai Xoyois avTa KaTaXa - (3dv ovk evi' vnepfiaivei yap avTcov to peyedos iK 7 roXXov tov irepiovros ttjs rjpeTepas diavoias tt/v evTeXeiav. Ibid. Hence St. Augustine saith, Mentibus non minus necessariam esse illuminationis gratiam quam oculis lumen, imo oculos ipsi aperi- mus ad cernendam lucem : mentis autem oculi nisi a Domino aperian- tur clausi manent. Aug. de peccat. mer. et remis. L 2. 280 Of Freewill. Art. natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him: neither can he know them , because they are spiritually discerned. 1 Cor. ii. 14. He is so far from looking upon the wisdom of God as wisdom, that he looks upon it as foolishness. Neither can he know them , because they are spiritually discerned. They are above his reach. So that a man may as well read the letter of the scripture without eyes, as receive the mysteries of the scriptures without grace. Now considering that the will always acteth according to the ultimate dictate of the practical understanding, so as to refuse whatsoever the practical understanding brings before it under the ugly dress of evil; and to choose whatsoever it presents to it under the notion of true good ; and seeing that the natural understanding presents the will with evil instead of good, and good instead of evil; it must needs follow, that the will of itself cannot refuse but choose what is truly evil, nor choose but refuse what is truly good, unless it should cross the course of nature in choosing what the understanding saith is evil, and refusing what the understanding dictates as good. And therefore so long as a man is in his natural estate, it is impossible that of himself he should so much as look after any other, seeing he accounts his own present sinful condition to be the best, and that if he should change, he should but change for the worse. Nay further, suppose the understanding should be so far enlightened as to discern the evil from the good, yet, for all that, it would be impossible for the will of itself to prefer the good before the evil. For though it be a constant rule in natural things for the will to follow the last conclusive sen¬ tence of the practical understanding, yet it is not so in sph rituals. For though the understanding do present God as the chiefest good, and sin as the greatest evil, yet the will cannot of itself embrace the former nor refuse the latter as it ought to do, and that because itself is corrupted as well as the understanding. And therefore should the understanding per¬ form its office aright, it doth not follow the will should be able to perform its aright too ; for then all the fault would be in the understanding, and the will remain as perfect after its corruption as it was in its first creation. But seeing it cannot X, Of Freewill. 281 be denied but that the m will is vitiated and depraved as well as the understanding, it nqmst needs be granted that the will is unable to do its duty as well as the understanding. And hence it is that we find in ourselves, that though God is pleased often so far to enlighten our dark understanding as to discover the beauty of holiness and sinfulness of sin to us, yet we cannot but hate and refuse the former, we cannot but receive and love the latter. This is that which St. Paul had the woful experience of: For that which I do I allow not: for that which I would do , that do I not; hut what I hate , that do I, Rom. vii. 15. And if it be so after, how much more is it so before conversion ? And therefore it is requisite, in order to our conversion, that the understanding be not only so enlight¬ ened as to discern the evil from the good, but that our wills be so rectified a,s to prefer the good before the evil. By which rectifying, or bringing of the will into its right order again, its liberty is not destroyed 11 but healed; so that it is m Heec voluntas (animalis) vaga, incerta, instabilis, imperita, infirma ad efficiendum, facilis ad audiendum, in cupiditatibus caeca, in honoribus tumida, curisanxia, suspicionibus in- quieta, gloriae quam virtutum avidior, famae quam conscientise diligentior, et per omnem suam experientiam miserior fruendo iis quae concupive- rit quam carendo, nihil in suis habet viribus nisi periculi facilitatem, quo- niam voluntas mutabilis quae non ab incommutabili voluntate regitur, tanto citius propinquat iniquitati, quanto acrius intenditur actioni. Prosper (al.Ambros.) de vocat, gent. 1 . i. c. [6.] Licet insit homini bo- num nolle, tamen nisi donatum non habet bonum velle. Et illud con- traxit natura per culpam, hoc reci- pit natura per gratiam. Ibid. c. [25,] And, in his poetical strain, 1 . de in- gratis, c. 27. [p. 563.] the same Fa¬ ther sings thus : - Hinc arbitrium per devia lapsum Claudicat,etcsesis conatibus inque ligatis iMotus inest, non error abest: manet ergo voluntas Semper amans aliquid quo se ferat, et labyrintho Fallitur, ambages dubiarum ingressa vi- arum. Vana cupit, vanis tumet et timet, omni- mod aque Mobilitate ruens in vulnera vulnere surgit. n Qua gratia humanum non au- fertur sed sanatur, non adimitur sed corrigitur, non removetur sed illu- minatur, non evacuatur sed adjuva- tur atque servatur arbitrium, ut in quo infirmitatem homo habuit, in eo habere incipiat sanitatem ; quo erra- bat eodem in viam redeat; in quo caecus fuit, in eo accipiat lumen; et ubi fuit iniquus, serviens immun- ditiae et iniquitati ad iniquitatem, ibi gratia praeventus atque adjutus serviat justitiae in sanctificationem. Fulgent, de incar. et grat. Christ. [Ep. 17. 41.] Ac per hoc sicut lex non evacuatur sed statuitur per fi- dem, quia tides impetrat gratiam qua lex impleatur; ita liberum arbitrium non evacuatur per gratiam sed sta¬ tuitur, quia gratia sanat voluntatem qua justitia libere diligatur. Aug. de spiritu et lit. ad Marcellin. [52. vol. X. p. 114.] 282 Of Freewill. Art. free after as well as before conversion ; yea, free to God and holiness, as it was before free only to sin and wickedness. And this was the doctrine of the primitive church. St. Au¬ gustine (in whose days °Pelagius first rose up against this truth) hath writ several volumes to this purpose, out of which I shall pick out only some few sentences for the confirmation of this truth. 44 P Neither,” saith he, 44 doth a man begin to be converted or changed from evil to good by the beginnings of faith, unless the free and undeserved mercy of God work it in him.’ 1 And presently, q 44 So therefore let the grace of God be accounted of, that from the beginning of his good conversion to the end of his perfection, he that glorieth should glory in the Lord. Because as none can begin a good work without the Lord, so none can perfect it without the Lord.” And elsewhere the same Father saith, r 44 That the grace of God by Jesus Christ our Lord, (which the true faith and ca¬ tholic church always holds,) translates or converts both small and great from the death of the first man unto the life of the second, not only by blotting out their sins, but also by helping such as can use the liberty of the will not to sin, but to live holily; so as that unless he do help, we can have no piety or righteousness in word nor in will; for it is God that worJceth in us both to will and to do of his own good pleasure. For who ° Quis unquam ante profanum ilium Pelagium tantam virtutem li- beri praesumpsit arbitrii, ut ad hoc in bonis rebus per actus singulos adjuvandum necessariam Dei gra- tiam non putaret. Vincent. Lyrin. adv. haeres. 1. i. c. 34. [p. 108.] p Nec omnino incipit homo ex malo in bonum per initium fidei cormnutari, nisi hoc in illo agat in- debita et gratuita misericordia Dei. Aug. contra duas epist. Pelag. 1 . 2. [23. vol. X.] Q Sic itaque Dei gratia cogitetur,ut ab initio bonae mutationis suae usque in finem consummationis qui glo- riatur in Domino glorietur. Quia sicut nemo potest bonum inchoare sine Domino, sic nemo perficere sine Domino. Ibid. r Quod gratia Dei per Jesum Christum Dominum nostrum (quod tides vera et catholica tenet semper ecclesia) pusillos cum magnis a morte primi hominis ad vitam se- cundi hominis transfert, non solum peccata delendo verum etiam ad non peccandum recteque vivendum eos, qui jam uti possunt voluntatis arbi- trio, sic adjuvando, ut nisi adjuvet, nihil pietatis atque justitiae sive in opere sive etiam in ipsa voluntate habere possimus: Deus enimoperatur in nobis et velle et operari pro bona voluntate. Nam quis nisi qui venit quasrere et salvare quod perierat ab ilia perditionis massa et contentione discernit ? Unde apostolus inter- rogat dicens, Quis enim te discernit? Ubi si dixerit homo, Fides mea, vo¬ luntas mea, bonum opus meuin, re- spondetur ei. Quid enim habes quod non accepisti ? Aug. Epist. ad Pau- linum. [186. 3. vol. II.] X. Of Freewill. 283 but he that came to seek and to save that which was lost, can make any one differ from that mass of perdition \ Where¬ fore the apostle asketh the question, saying, For who made thee to differ ? Where if any one say, My faith, my will, my good work; it is answered him, For what hast thou that thou hast not received And again; “ s For it is certain we may keep the commandments of God if we will; but because the will is prepared by the Lord, (it seems not by ourselves,) we must ask of him that we may will as much as is sufficient, that willing we might do. It is certain that we do will when we will, but it is he that makes us that we will what is good. 1 ’’ And presently, 1 “ It is certain that we act when we act, but it is he that maketh us to act, affording most effectual strength unto the will.” And thus Maxentius tells us, u “ We believe that the natural freewill is able to do no more than to discern and desire carnal or worldly things; which not with God, yet per¬ haps amongst men may seem glorious : but those things which belong to eternal life, it can neither think, nor will, nor desire, nor perform, but only by the infusion and inward working of the Holy Ghost, which is also the Spirit of Christ. Fulgentius hath also many things to this purpose, that it is God that both prepares our hearts for grace, and increaseth that grace in our hearts. x “ From whence we know,” saith he, “it is from God that we are willing to do good, and that we are able to do good.” And elsewhere, y “ We have not s Certum est enim nos servare mandata si volumus : sed quia prae- paratur voluntas a Domino ab illo petendum est ut tantum velimus quantum sufficit, ut volendo, facia- mus. Certum est nos velle cum volumus, sed ille facit ut velimus bonum. Id. de gratia et libero ar- bitrio; ad Valentinum. [ 32 . V0I . X.] 1 Certum est nos facere cum faci- mus, sed ille facit ut faciamus prae- bendo vires efficacissimas voluntati. Ibid. u Liberum naturale arbitrium ad nihil aliud valere credimus nisi ad discernenda tantum et desideranda carnalia sive secularia; quae non apud Deum sed apud homines pos- sunt fortassis videri gloriosa: ad ea vero quae ad vitam aeternam perti¬ nent nec cogitare, nec velle, nec de- siderare, nec perficere posse, nisi per infusionem et inoperationem in- trinsecus Spiritus Sancti, qui est etiam Spiritus Christi. Maxent. Confess, fidei. [Bibl. Max. Patr. vol. IX. p. 537.] x Unde cognoscimus Dei esse ut bonum facere velimus, et ut bonum facere valeamus. Fulg. de praedest. ad Monim. 1 . 1. [cap. ix.] y Non ergo Spiritual Sanctum quia credimus sed ut crederemus accepimus. Forma enim praecessit 284 Of Freewill . Art. therefore received the Spirit of God because we do believe, but that we may believe. For the same manner went before in the flesh of Christ, that we should spiritually acknowledge in our faith. For Christ the Son of God was according to the flesh conceived by the Holy Ghost and born; but that flesh the Virgin could neither conceive nor ever bring forth, unless the Holy Ghost had wrought the rising of the same flesh. And so in the heart of man faith can neither be com ceived nor increased, unless the Holy Ghost doth both pour it in and nourish it.’’ 1 And therefore he tells us in another place, z “ He delivers us not by finding faith in any man, but by giving it. 11 And presently, au But it is clear because, that a man should begin to believe in God, he receiveth from God repentance unto life; so that he could not believe at all unless he receiveth repentance by the gift of the merciful God. But what is man's repentance but the changing of the will ? God therefore that giveth man repentance doth also change his will." The second council of Orange, an. Horn. 529, determined many things to this purpose; amongst the rest they say, b “ If any man say that mercy is conferred by God upon us believing, willing, desiring, endeavouring, labouring, watching, studying, asking, seeking, knocking, without the grace of God, in carne Christi quam in nostra fide spirit ualiter agnoscamus. Nam Chris- tus Filius Dei secundum carnem de Spiritu Sancto conceptus et natus est; carnem autem illam nec conci- pere virgo possit aliquando nec pa- rere, nisi ejusdem carnis Spiritus Sanctus operaretur exortum. Sic ergo in hominis corde nec concipi tides poterit nec augeri, nisi earn Spiritus S. effundat et nutriat. Id. de incarn. et grat. Christi; [ep. xvii. 40.] z Liberavit autem non in quolibet homine fidem inveniendo sed dando. Ibid. [34.] a Claret tamen quia ut homo in Deum credere incipiat a Deo accipit poenitentiam ad vitam, ita ut ornnino credere non possit nisi poenitentiam dono Dei miserantis acceperit. Quae est autem poenitentia hominis nisi mutatio voluntatis ? Deus ergo qui homini poenitentiam dat, ipse mutat hominis voluntatem. Ibid. b Si quis sine gratia Dei credenti- bus, volentibus, desiderantibus, co- nantibus, laborantibus, vigilantibus, studentibus, petentibus, quaerenti- bus, pulsantibus, nobis misericor- diam dicit conferri divinitus, non autem ut credamus, velimus, vel haec omnia sicut oportet agere va- learnus per infusionem et inspira- tionem Spiritus S. in nobis fieri confitetur, et aut humilitati aut obe- dientiae humanae subjungit gratiae adjutorium, nec ut obedientes et humiles simus ipsius gratiae donum esse consensit, resistit Apostolo di- centij Quid habes quod non accepisti ? Et gratia Dei sum id quod sum. Con- cil. Arausic. II. Can. vi. [vol. II. p. 1099.] X. of Freewill. 285 but doth not confess that it is only by the infusion and inspi¬ ration of the Holy Ghost into us that we believe, will, and are able to do all these things as we ought to do, and maketh the help of grace to follow after either man’s humility or obe¬ dience, nor will grant that it is the gift of grace itself that we are obedient and humble, he resisteth the apostle, saying, What hast thou that thou hast not received ? and, By the grace of God I am what I am? And so the African council too: c “ We determine that the sentence against Pelagius and Ccelestius, uttered by the reverend bishop Innocent from the see of the blessed apostle, do remain until they acknowledge by open confession, that the grace of God by Jesus Christ our Lord doth help us by single acts, not only to know, but also to do righteousness; so that without it we can neither have, think, speak, nor do any true and holy piety.” So that we may well conclude this with that of Alcuinus; ** “ I could defile myself, but I cannot cleanse myself, unless thou, O Lord Jesu, by the sprinkling of thy blood, dost make me cleanor that of Ambrosius Ansbertus; e “ It is by God’s preventing grace that we are saved, and it is by his subsequent grace that we are justified so that we cannot turn or prepare ourselves , by our own strength , to faith and calling upon God: wherefore we have no power to do good works pleasant and acceptable to God , without the grace of Christ preventing us , that we may have a good will , and working with us when we have it. c Constituimus in Pelagium et Ccelestium per venerandum epi- scopum Innocentium de beatissimi Apostoli sede prolatam manere sen- tentiam, donee apertissima confes- sione fateantur gratiam Dei per Jesum Christum Dominum nos¬ trum, non solum ad cognoscendam verum etiam ad faciendam justitiam nos per actus singulos adjuvare; ita ut sine ilia nihil verse sanctseque pietatis habere, cogitare, dicere. agere valeamus. Concil. African, apud Prosper, contra Collatorem. [p. 890.] . d Sordidare me potui sed emun- dare nequeo, nisi tu Domine Jesu sancti sanguinis tui aspersione mun- dum me facias. Alcuin. in Ps. 50. enar. [p. 66.] e Praeveniente gratia salvamur, subsequente justificamur. Ambros. Ansbert. in Apoc. 1 . [ult. vol. X. p. 441.] ARTICLE XI. OF THE JUSTIFICATION OF MAN. We are accounted righteous before God only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith, and not for our own good works or deservings: wherefore, that we are justified by faith only is a most wholesome doctrine, and very full of comfort, as more largely is expressed in the homily of Jus¬ tification. O RIGINAL sin (as we saw in the eighth article) being both the fault and corruption of the human nature, and so all of us not only defiled with it, but also guilty of it, man was thereby plunged into such a gulf of misery, that it is impossible for him in his own strength ever to recover himself from it. That he is not able to wash away that filth of sin that is inherent in him hath been proved in the foregoing article: that he is not able of himself to blot out that guilt of sin that lies upon him is asserted in this. There we see we could not be made righteous but by God's grace implanted in us; here we see we cannot be accounted righteous but by Christ's merits imputed to us. Where we may likewise ob¬ serve, how whatsoever we lost in the first we gained in the second Adam. Are we accounted sinners by Adam's sin imputed to us ? we are accounted righteous by Christ's righteousness laid upon us. Are we made sinners also by Adam's sin inherent in us? We are made righteous also by Christ's righteousness imparted to us; his Spirit being ours for the sanctification, as well as Adam's sin was ours for the corruption of our natures; and his merit ours for the justifi- Art. XI. Of the Justification of Mari * 287 cation, as well as Adam's transgression is ours for the con¬ demnation of our persons. By this merit it is that we are accounted righteous before God; where we may take notice by the way, how our being justified is here expressed by our being accounted righteous, and not by our being made righteous: for it is not by in¬ hesion of grace in us, but by the imputation of righteousness to us that we are justified; as it is not by the imputation of righteousness to us, but by the inhesion of grace in us that we are sanctified. Thus we find the apostle, speaking of the justification of Abraham, saying, Abraham believed God ,, a and a Kat iXoyicrdr] avrai els biKacoavviju, Rom. iv. 3. which we translate. And it was counted, or imputed, to him for righteousness j which exposition of the words though it hath been much opposed, yet certainly this is both the most ancient and the truest notion of them. For so the Syriac, Et repu- tatum est ei in justitiam, and pre¬ sently, OlZ.Q-LV] ,»Q1 OlAk Reputatur fides ei ad jus¬ titiam. Where we may observe how this translation renders the Greek A oyl^ogai by ^ : and so doth the Arabic also render it by £>5 2©n, in both places. So that what is the right notion of iron in the Old, may well be admitted as the best interpretation of A oyl£opai in the New Testament. Now though 2inn do sometimes signify simply cogitavit, putavit, yet we know how in the Hebrew language, where there is no composition of verbs, the compound is always implied in the simple, and therefore the simple still used to express the compound : e. g. m2, that signifies simply venit, signifies also advenit, pervenit, evenit, convenit, &c. And so here 2urn, that signifies simply cogitavit, pu¬ tavit, signifies also imputavit, repu- tavit, computavit, supputavit . As mnn upr 1 ? 2 x0 m m, Et imputabitur ei sanguis, Levit. xvii. 4. as the Latin translation hath it. Jonathan expresses it clearly, Svtcp o*m rp 1 ? mm mnn 2«mrv ten mDi din; “ The blood of homi¬ cide shall be imputed to him, and it shall be to him as if he had shed innocent blood.” So that 2tt>n here signifies such an imputation as makes a man accounted as if he had shed innocent blood, when in himself he was not guilty of it. And what 2'em here signifies, Xoy'Jopai in Greek must needs signify. For as in the New Testament the Oriental translations render the Greek A oyl- {opai by 2 eh, so here the Greek translation renders 2 Err by Aoyt- £opcu, Kai XoyicrdrjcreTai r OeS Kai e\oyt(r6r) aiirco els biKaioavvrjV, the very words which the apostle quoteth in the place we are speaking to. It was counted or imputed to him for righteousness. So that both the Hebrew mm and the Greek Xo-yi- £opai do both import an external imputation of a thing to a man, not an internal inhesion of it in him. And therefore the righteousness that is here said X oyl£ea6ai, is not any thing in ourselves to whom it is imputed, but in him who doth im¬ pute it. And therefore may the place well be translated, it was counted, reckoned, or imputed to him: and therefore they do but beat the air while they cavil at this place, es¬ pecially considering that the Hebr. ism, which they pretend makes so much for them, makes more against them. XT. Of the Justification of Man. m and therefore glorified in him. b Our sins were laid upon him, and therefore he died for us in time ; his righteousness is laid upon us, and therefore we shall live with him to eternity. Thus was the innocent punished as if he was guilty, that the guilty might be rewarded as if they were innocent. And thus are we accounted as righteous in him, as he was accounted as a sinner for us. He was accounted as a sinner for us, and therefore he was condemned; we are accounted as righteous in him, and therefore we are justified. And this is the right notion of justification as distinguished from sanctification. Not as if these two were severed or divided in their subjects; no, every one that is justified is also sanctified, and every one that is sanctified is also justified. But yet the acts of justification and sanctification are two distinct things : for the one denotes the imputation of right¬ eousness to us; the other denotes the implantation of right¬ eousness in us. And therefore, though they be both the acts of God, yet the one is the act of God towards us, and the other is the act of God in us. Our c justification is in God only, not in ourselves; our sanctification is in ourselves only, and not in God. By our sanctification we are made righteous in ourselves, but not accounted righteous by God; by our justification we are accounted righteous by God, but not made righteous in ourselves. b Longe a facie mea verba delic¬ torum meorum. Quorum delictorum de quo dictum est, qui peccatum non fecit nec inventus est dolus in ore ejus ? Quomodo ergo dicit delictorum meorum, nisi quia pro delictis nostris ille precatur, et delicta nostra sua delicta fecit, ut justitiam suam nos- tram justitiarn faceret ? Aug. in Psa. xxi. Expos, sec. [3. vol. IV.] c There are many expressions in the Fathers that import so much, that our justification is in God only, not in ourselves : as. Ipse ergo pec¬ catum, ut nos justitia, non nostra sed Dei; nec in nobis sed in ipso. Aug. Enchirid. ad Laurent. [13. vol. VI.] Ipsa quoque nostra jus¬ titia quamvis vera sit propter veri boni finem ad quem refertur, tamen BEVERIDGE. tanta est in hac vita, ut potius pec- catorum remissione constat quam perfectione virtutum. Id. de civitate Dei, 1 . 19. c. 27. init. [vol. VII.] Sufficit mihi ad omnem justitiam solum habere propitium cui soli peccavi : omne quod mihi ipse non imputare decreverit sic est quasi non fuerit. Non peccare Dei justitia est; hominis justitia indulgentia Dei. Bernard, in Cant. hom. 23. ’E selvq yap rj nporepa, vopov Ka'i epycov tiKaioavvq, avrq 8e 6eov bLKaioo-uvq. Chrysost. [vol. III. p. 611.] in 2 Corinth.hom.11. Tunc ergo justi sumus quando nos peccatores fa- temur. Et justitia nostra non ex proprio merito sed ex Dei consistit misericordia. Hieron. adv. Pelag. 1. 1. [13. vol. II.] U 290 Of the Justification of Man. Art. And we are thus justified, or accounted righteous before God , only for the merit of our Lord Jesus Christ , and not for our own works. As it is not by our own strength that we can be sanctified in ourselves, so it is not by our own works that we can be justified before God. But as it is only by the Spirit of Christ that our natures can be made, so it is only by the merit of Christ that our persons can be accounted righteous. And seeing this merit of Christ is made over unto us by our faith in him, we are therefore said to be justified by faith , not as it is an act in us, but as it applies Christ to us. We are therefore said to be justified by faith in Christ, because we should not be justified by Christ without faith. Wherefore , that we are justified by faith only , is wholesome doctrine , and very full of comfort , as more largely is expressed in the homily Of Justification , whither I refer the reader for more satisfaction in that particular; I in the meanwhile endeavouring to demonstrate, that this doctrine, that we are justified by faith only without works, is not only whole¬ some and comfortable doctrine, but also consonant both to the scripture, reason, and Fathers. And first for the scriptures; what mystery do they more clearly open, what truth do they more expressly assert than this ? Let us hear St. Paul's judgment in the case : Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law d , Rom. iii. 28: that a e man, in general any man, high or low, Jew or Gentile, every one that is justified, is justified only by faith in Christ, not by the deeds of the law. And again: Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law , but by the faith of Jesus Christ , even we have believed in Jesus Christ , that we might be justified by the faith of Christ , and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. Gal. ii. 16. For by grace are ye saved d Sin autem scribit, Existimamus fide justificari hominem sine operibus, siquidem unus est Deus qui justificat circumcisionem ex fide et prceputium, per fidem, manifeste ostendit non in hominis merito sed in Dei gratia esse justitiam, qui sine legis operi¬ bus credentium suscipit fidem. Hie- ron. adv. Pelag. 1 . 2. [7. vol. II.] e O vk ehvev ’I ovbaiov r) tov xmo top vopov ovTa, dXX e^ayaycov tov \6yov els evpvx^plav sell rfj oiKOvpevp tcis dvpas dvol^as rrjs crcoTrjplas, fiqar\v avdpomov, to kolvov ttjs (pvcrecos ovopci dels. Chrysost. in loc. [vol. III.p.48.] XT. Of the Justification of Man. 291 through faith ; and that not of yourselves ; it is the gift of God ; not of works , lest any man should boast. Ephes. ii. 8, 9. Hence it is that we find the same apostle saying elsewhere, Yea doubtless , and I account all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things , and do account them but dung , that I may win Christ , and be found in him , not having my own righteous¬ ness, which is of the law , but that which is through the faith of Christ , the righteousness which is of God by faith. Phil. iii. 8, 9. This doctrine the apostle also confirms in Abraham. That Abraham was accounted righteous we all grant: but how, by the works of the law \ No ; he believed God , and that was accounted to him for righteousness , Gen. xv. 6. Rom. iv. 3. Now if Abraham, who performed so many good works by faith, and yet was justified by faith, and not by those good works, this (as St. Chrysostome f observes) doth much debase the merits of works, and exalt the power of faith. And s St. Au¬ gustine takes notice how he here brings in Abraham for an example of our justification by faith, to shew that our being justified by faith, and not by works, should not at all lessen our endeavours after good works, but rather heighten them, seeing that Abraham, who was justified by faith, was also full of good works; though it was not by those good works, but by faith, that he was justified. And so any man, though it be not for his good works he doth that he is justified, yet if he be justified, he will do good works. And in this sense it is that St. James tells us that a, man is justified by works , and not f ’E7retSj) yap ava> Ka\ Karat tovto ecrrpe(f)ov ’lovdaloi, on 6 7rarpiap^r]s koi rq> 0f&) cf)i\os TrepLToprjv idei-aro npatros, (3ov\erai deltjai otl ko.\ is el- vos i< Triareats ibiKaiioOrj' onep rj v 7T€piovcria vlkt/s 7 ToWrjs' to pev yap ipya prj e^ovra it c nLcrreats biKaiat- 6rjvai nva, ovbiv aireiKos’ to 8e ko- patvra iv KaropOatpacrL pr) ivrevOev d\X ano TriaTcats ycvicrOai 8'iKaiov, tovto rjv Oavpacrrov, Kal paXurra rijs 7 TL(TT€a)S TT)V Ict^vv ip(j)aivov. Chry- sost. in Rom. hom. 8. [p. 55.] s Ideoque magis Abrahee utitur exemplo, vacuam esse fidem si non bene operetur, quoniam Abrahse exemplo etiam Paulus apostolus usus est, ut probaret, Justificari lio- minem sine operibus legis. Cum enim bona opera commemorat Abraliae, quae ejus fidem comitata sunt, satis ostendit Paulum apostolum non ita per Abrabam docere justificari ho- minem per fidem sine operibus, ut si quis crediderit, non ad eum perti- neat bene operari; sed ad hoc potius, ut nemo mentis priorum bonorum operum arbitretur se pervenire ad donum justification^ quae est in fide. Aug. 1 . 83. quaest. q. 76. [vol. VI.] u 2 292 Of the Justification of Man. Art. by faith only , Jac. ii. 24; and faith without works is dead , ver. 26 : that is, though it is by faith we are justified, and by faith only, yet not by such a faith as hath no works accompanying of it: no, every such faith is a dead faith ; so that faith with¬ out works is as unable to justify us, as works without faith. And yet it is not from the works that accompany our faith, but from the faith which is accompanied by our works, that we are justified. And therefore St. Paul and St. James do not contradict each other h ; for the one speaks of the works which go before, the other speaks of the works that follow after justification. A man is justified by faith only, and not by works; but a man that is justified cannot but have works also as well as faith. And as his person is justified by faith only before God, so is his faith justified by works only before men and his own conscience. It is by faith only, and not by works, that a man is accounted righteous in heaven; but it is by works only, and not by faith, that a man is esteemed righteous upon earth. So that though a man be justified by his faith that goes before, we do not know that he is justified but only by his works that follow after. And, indeed, were the scriptures silent in this point, even in shewing that we are justified by faith only, and not by works, my reason would not suffer me to contradict it. For how is it possible that the works of finite creatures, or 1 any thing but the merits of Christ, should be able to blot out the sins that are committed against an infinite Creator ? or that the fig-leaves of our own pretended merits should hide our nakedness from the eyes of an all-seeing God? And if we cannot expiate our sins, how can we justify our persons ? If we cannot but be accounted sinners for all our works, how can we be accounted as righteous for any of them ? especially considering that whatsoever we have or are, is God's; our souls, bodies, estates, time, parts, gifts, all is God's; and h Quare non sunt sibi contrariae quae fidem sequuntur. Ibid, duorum apostolorum sententiae Pauli i T l yap aXXo ras apaprLas ppwv et Jacobi, cum dicit unus justificari vp3p K.a\v\j/airj eKelvov biKaiocrvvry, hominem per fidem sine operibus, iv tlvi biK.aui)6rjvai hvvarov tovs avo- et alius inanem esse fidem sine povs KCtl do-efiels, rj iv pova> tg> operibus. Quia ille dicit de operibus Y Icp rov Qeov; Justin. Epist. ao quae fidem praecedunt, iste de his Diognet. [9.] XL Of the Justification of Man. 293 therefore whatsoever we do, we are bound to do it for him, seeing whatsoever we have, we have received from him. What therefore, if I should fast my body into a skeleton, and pray my tongue, and hear my ears, to their very stumps ? What though I should water my couch continually with my tears, fasten my knees always to the earth by prayer, and fix my eyes constantly into heaven by meditation ? What though I should give every thing I have to my poor distressed neigh¬ bours, and spend each moment of my time in the immediate worshipping of my glorious Maker? Would any of this be more than I am bound to do ? Should not I still be an un¬ profitable servant ? And k if I can do no more than is my duty unto God, how can I merit any thing by what I do for him? How can he be indebted unto me for my paying of what I owe to him ? But suppose the case for once, though it be a strange, and to me an irrational supposition, that we may merit something from God by our obedience to him ; but what ? must nothing less than eternal glories be accepted as a just reward for tem¬ poral duties ? What, nothing less than justification here, and salvation hereafter, merited by a few weak performances ? Seriously, I wonder how any one should suffer such a thought to creep into his heart, much more that any one should lodge it there, and then use all his endeavour to defend it. Certainly if any one do, he must either have very high thoughts of his own merits, or very low ones of God's presence. For my own part, it is a greater happiness I expect when dead, than I am able to deserve whilst I am alive. And I am sure the fathers k AovXco yap avdyKrj eViKemu to nXr/povv ras evroXas tov K vplov, ov prjv cos KaropScopa enLypaf^ecrdaL eav- tco tovto ocpelXei' el yap prj epya- crrjTai Trk-qycov atjicoreos' eVei 8 e ep- ydcraro apKelcrdco on ras TrXrjyds etje- f ^ f / ocoKapev tcov eis rjpas virrjpypevcov irapct tov Qeov Tipcov. Id. IIpos tov ’2TeXe)(iov 7 re pi Karavv^ecos. [vol. VI. p. I 57 ‘] BA eireis 7 reds nacra ecos OavciTov eTTiTeXovpevrj \_dpeTij~] ovbev erepov, rj dpapTias dnofij ; cipapTias be birof] (pvaecos ecrTiv epyov ov fiacnXelas dvrdXXaypa. Marc. Here- mit. de iis qui putant ex operibus justificari, c. 24. IIpos to bopa ovv o peXXovcri KXrjpovopelv tovto dv tls op- debs e’inoi, el eteaaTOs a(f) ov eKTicrdrj 6 *A bap ecos ttjs awTeXelas tov koct- pov enoXepei 7 rpos tov 'ZaTavav Kal vnepeive tcis 6 Xl^/eis, ovbev peya enolei 7 rpos tijv bo£av rjv peXXei kXtj- povopelv' crvp( 3 acnXevcrei yap eis tovs alcovas perd Xpiarov. Macar. He¬ rein. ^Bgypt. hom. 15. [31.] Totis licet et animae et corporis laboribus desudemus, totis licet obedientiae viribus exerceamur, nihil tamen con- dignum merito pro caelestibus bonis compensare et offerre valeamus. Non valent vitae praesentis obsequia aeternae vitae gaudiis comparari. Eu- seb. Emissen. ad Monach. serm. 3. [p. 98.] Nihil moleste potest susti- neri in hac vita mortali, quod cae- lestibus gaudiis ex aequo respondere sufficiat. Petr. Bles. in Job. 42. [p. 424.] Gratia autem etiam ipsa vita aeterna non injuste dicitur, quia non solum donis suis Deus dona sua reddit, sed quia tantum etiam ibi gratia divinae retributionis exuberat, ut incomparabiliter atque ineffabili- ter omne meritum, quamvis bonae et ex Deo datae, humanae voluntatis atque operationis excedat. Fulgent, de praedestinatione, ad Monim. 1 . 1. [10.] Nam ut taceam quod merita omnia dona Dei sunt, et ita homo magis propter ipsa Deo debitor est quam Deus homini, quid sunt merita omnia ad tantam gloriam ? Bern. Serm. prim, in annunc. B. Mariae, [p. 160.] XI. Of the Justification of Man. 295 all we do by our own strength is a sin, so whatsoever we do well, we do by the strength of God; and therefore we are so far from deserving any thing from him, that we are but more bound to him for our good works. Whensoever we do any thing for God, we do not pay him whai we owe to him, but he is pleased still to lend more to us. And how can we deserve any thing from God by being more beholden to him ? If I sin, I must thank myself for it m ; if I do good, I must thank my God for it, being more indebted to him for every good work I do by him; and if I be more indebted to him for my doing of good works, certainly he cannot be indebted to me the re¬ warding of them. No, it is of God's grace that we do any thing that is good here, and it is of God's grace too if we receive any thing that is good hereafter. And as I shall be bound to thank God for the perfection of glory in heaven, so also for the beginning of grace on earth; it being of his own infinite mercy that he fills our hearts with grace in time, and of his own infinite mercy too that he crowns n his own grace with glory to eternity. And as for the Fathers, what more frequent in their writ¬ ings than that we are justified by faith only without works \ Primasius tells us, “°God justifieth the wicked by faith only, m Tua peccata sunt, merita Dei sunt. Aug. in Psa. LI I. [ii. 5. vol. IV.] Ipsa vita aeterna quae in fine ha- bebitur, et ideo mentis praecedentibus redditur, tamen quia eadem merita quibus redditur, non a nobis parata sunt per nostram sufficientiam, sed in nobis facta per gratiam, etiam ipsa gratia nuncupatur, non ob aliud nisi quia gratis datur ; nec ideo quia mentis non datur, sed quia data sunt et ipsa merita quibus datur. Id. Epist. [194. 19. vol. II.] ad Sixtum Roman, presbyteruin. Vix mihi suadeo quod possit ullum opus esse quod ex debito remunerationem Dei deposcat, cum etiam hoc ipsum quod agere aliquid possumus, vel cogitare, vel proloqui ipsius dono et largitione faciamus. Origen. in Rom. 1 . 4. [vol. IV. p. 522.] Neque enim talia sunt hominum merita, ut prop¬ ter ea vita aeterna deberetur ex jure, aut Deus injuriam aliquam faceret nisi earn donaret. Nam ut taceam quod merita omnia dona Dei sunt, et ita homo magis propter ipsa Deo debitor est quam Deus homini, &c. Bernard, in annunciat. B. Mar. serm. 1. [p. 160.] r/ 0era yap av tis T rpoaeveyKp 0 eco £k tcov avrov ra avrov 7 rpo(r(pep€i avreo. Agapet. Parsen. ad Justinianum Caesarem. [c. 43-] . n Nihil enim aliud quam gratiam suam coronat in nobis Deus. Ra- dulph. Dom. in Septuag. horn. 2. Supplicium tibi debetur et cum prae- mium venerit sua dona coronabit non tua merita. Aug. in Psa. lxx. [ii. 5. vol. IV.] 0 Impium per solam ficlem justi- ficat, non opera quae non liabuit. Si enim secundum opera, puniendus erat non liberanclus. Primas. in Rom. 4. [19.] 296 Of the Justification of Man. Art. and not by works which he had not : for if according to his works, he should be punished rather than redeemed.' 11 And Sedulias to the same purpose ; p “ Clod justifieth a converting sinner by faith only, not by good works which before he had not, otherwise he should be punished for his wicked works. 11 Whence Ennodius saith, °I “ If the heavenly Governor should look upon my merit, I should get either little good or great punishments. 11 And Polycarp tells the Philippians, r “ But believing ye shall rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory, into which many desire to enter; knowing that ye are saved by grace, not by works, but by the will of God through Jesus Christ. 11 St. Basil also hath delivered the same doctrine : s “ But this, 11 saith he, u is the perfect and only glorying in God, when one is not lifted up with his own righteousness, but acknowledgetli that he wanteth the true righteousness, and that it is by faith only in Christ that he can be justified. 11 And again ; t u Everlasting rest is laid up for them that strive lawfully in this present life, not to be given according to the debt of works, but exhibited according to the grace of the bountiful God to such as hope in him. 11 St. Chrysostome also, speaking of Abraham ; u “ For what did he lose by not being under the law? Nothing; for faith alone was sufficient for his justification or righteousness. 11 With which agreeth that of St. Hierome; x “ The faith of P Convertentem irapium per solam fidem justificat Deus, non per bona opera quae non habuit prius, alioquin per impietatis opera fuerat puni- endus. Sedul. in Rom. 4. Meritum meum regnator caeles- tis si attenderet, aut exigua bona adipiscerer, aut magna supplicia. Ennod. 1 . 2. epist. 10. ad Faust. [Bibl. Max. patr. vol. ix.] r Credentes autem gaudebitis gau- dio inenarrabili et glorificato, in quod multi desiderant introire, sci- entes quia gratia salvi facti estis, non ex operibus, sed in voluntate Dei per Jesum Christum. Poly carp. Epist. ad Philip, [p. 14.] s A vtt] yap brj f) reXeia l P LV T °v peyaXobcopov Qeov rots els avrov rj\- mKoori napexopevr). Id. in Psa. cxiv. [ibid. p. 267.] u Tt yap eS, 81 fjs TTCLVTOS TOVS OTT aiOJVOS 6 TravTOKpdreop 6 e 6 s eSiKaiaxrev. Clem, ad Corinth. [32.] V. et Chrysost. de fide et lege naturae, p. 838. vol. VI. ARTICLE XII. OF GOOD WORKS. Albeit that good works , which are the fruits of faith, and follow after justification , cannot put away our sins , and endure the severity of God's wrath; yet are they pleasing and acceptable to God hi Christ , and do spring out necessarily of a true and lively faith; in¬ somuch that by them a lively faith may be as evidently known as a tree discerned by the fruit. 4 LTHOUGH it hath pleased the great God of his infinite mercy, in the covenant of grace, to entail justification upon our faith in his promises only, and not upon obedience to his precepts; as he had in the covenant of works entailed it upon obedience to his precepts, and not upon faith in his promises only; yet it doth not follow that we are freed more from our obedience now than we were before. No ; but as when we were to be justified by our works, we were then bound to believe as well as to obey, though we were to be justified by our obedience, not by our faith; so now we are to be justified bv faith we are still bound to obev as well as to believe, though we are justified by our faith only, and not by our obedience. So that though our justification doth par¬ don the sins we have committed heretofore, a vet it doth not a Ex quibus omnibus claret quod recte arbitratur apostolus, justificari hominem per fidem sine operibus legis. Sed fortassis hsec aliquis audiens resolvatirr, et bene agendi negligentiam capiat, siquidem ad justificandum tides sola sufficit. Ad quem dicemus, quia post justifica- tionem si injuste aliquis agat, sine dubio justificationis gratiam sprevit. Neque ob hoc aliquis accipit veniam peccatorum, ut rursum sibi putet peccandi licentiam datam. Indul- gentia namque non futurorum sed pneteritorum criminum datur. Ori- gen. in Rom. 1 . 3. [vol. IV. p. 517.] Cum ergo dicit apostolus arbitrari se justificari hominem per fidem sine 300 Of Good Works. Art. give us liberty to commit sin hereafter. No; but now we are justified by faith without works, we are bound as much to obey as if we were to be justified by works without faith. And the reason is, because though we be justified by faith only, and not by works, yet we cannot be justified by such a faith as is without works. As works without faith cannot justify us, so neither can faith without works justify us; not because works help to justify us with faith, but because b faith is no justifying faith without works: or rather, because we can have no such true and lively faith as can justify us with¬ out works, but we shall necessarily have works also accom¬ panying of our faith. Though still it be not by our works that accompany our faith, but by our faith only that is accom¬ panied by our works that we are accounted righteous before God. And hence it is, after it is determined in the foregoing article that we are justified by faith only and not by works, it is immediately in this asserted, that works are pleasing and acceptable to God as well as faith; though it be for our faith only, and not for our works that God accepts of us, yet our works as well as faith are acceptable unto God : yea, and that they necessarily spring out from a true and lively faith, so that it is as impossible there should be true faith without good works, as that there should be good works without true faith; for as without faith our works are bad, so without works our operibus legis, non hoc agit ut per¬ cepts ac professa fide opera justitiae contemnantur, sed ut sciat se quis- que per fidem posse justificari, etiam- si legis opera non praecesserint. Aug. de fide et operibus. [21. vol. VI.] b Quis est qui non credit quod Jesus est Christus? Qui non sic vivit quomodo praecepit Christus. Multi enim dicunt Credo, sed fides sine operibus non salvat. Aug in epist. Johan, tract. 10. [1. vol. III. par. ii.] Quoniam ergo haec opinio tunc fuerat exorta, aliae apostolicae epistolae Petri, Johannis, Jacobi, Judae, contra earn maxime dirigunt intentionem, ut vehementer asserant fidem sine operibus nihil prodesse. Sicut etiam ipse Paulus non qua- lemlibet fidem qua in Deum credi- tur, sed et earn salubrem plane quam evangelicam definivit, cujus opera ex dilectione procedunt. Et Jides, inquit, quce per dilectionem operatur. Unde illam fidem quae sufficere ad salutem quibusdam videtur, ita nihil prodesse asseverat ut dicat. Si ha- beam omnem fidem ita ut mantes transfieram, charitatem autem non habeam, nihil sum. Ubi autem haec fidelis charitas operatur, sine dubio bene vivitur, plenitudo enim legis charitas. Id. de fide et operibus. [c. xiii. s. 21.] M r) 8 i) v 6 [u£e ore 77 nlcrris, (’lye niaTLv xpr) KaXdv rrjv vno Ta)V epyoov tgiv crcov eXeyxopevrjv, croo- arai ae bvvrjcreTai. [Isidor.] Pelusiot. 1. 3. epist. 73. XII. Of Good WorJcs 301 faith is dead. And therefore may a true faith be as evidently known by its works, as a tree is clearly discerned by its fruit. If I see fruit growing upon a tree, I know what tree it is upon which such fruit grows. And so if I see how a man lives, I know by that how he believes. If his faith be good, his works cannot but be good too; and if his works be bad, his faith cannot but be bad too. For wheresoever there is a justifying faith there are also good works; and wheresoever there are no good works there is no justifying faith. The sum is this : though works do not justify us as well as faith, yet they are pleasing unto God as well as faith; and that wheresoever there is faith there are also good works, as wheresoever there are good works there is also faith. Which doctrine is grounded upon and consonant to both scripture, reason, and Fathers. As, first, that good works are pleasing unto God, how fre¬ quently hath God himself, who best knows what is pleasing to himself, taught us in his holy scripture ? for thus saith the Lord of hosts by his apostle Paul: I exhort , that , first of all , supplications, prayers , intercessions , and giving of thanks , be made for all men ; for kings , and for all that are in authority ; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour. 1 Tim. ii. 1—3. And again : Children , obey your parents: for this is well pleasing to the Lord. Coloss. iii. 20. And therefore saith St. Paul, But I have all , and abound: I am full , having received of Epaphroditus the things which were sent from you , an odour of a sweet smell , a sacrifice acceptable , well pleasing unto God. Phil. iv. 18. Thus hath c Enoch this c He that looketh for this testi¬ mony of Enoch, that he pleased God, in the Hebrew Bible, will look in vain; but if you look into the Sep- tuagint, there be sure you will find it: for where it is said, n'nbsn n«, And Enoch walked with God , Gen. v. 22, the Septuagint translates it et ppeo-rrjae de ’Ez/ob;^ rw ©ecu ; and so indeed doth the Syriac render it also, joi-lf] yQJLt* And Enoch pleased God. Now the Septuagint translation of the Bible being most in use at that time when he wrote, the apostle here (as also elsewhere) doth not quote this testi¬ mony of Enoch as it is recorded in Hebrew, but as it is translated into Greek. And howsoever, he pleased God is tantamount to he walked with God: for he could not please God unless he walked with him; neither could he walk with him but he would please him. And therefore 302 Of Good Works. Art. testimony , that lie pleased God , Ileb. xi. 5. And St. Paul hav¬ ing exhorted the Thessalonians to good works adds, Further¬ more we beseech you , brethren , and exhort you by the Lord Jesus Christ , that as ye have received from us how ye ought to walk and to please God , so you would abound more and more , 1 Thess. iv. 1. Thus hath it pleased the Lord to acquaint us how much he is pleased with our obeying him. And that good works do constantly accompany that faith that justifieth us before God, as well as pleaseth that God that justifies us by faith, is likewise clear from scripture. For St. Paul, speaking of this saving justifying faith, saith, it worketh by love , Gal. v. 6; and the same apostle tells us elsewhere, that love is the fulfilling of the whole law , Pom. xiii. 10: and if faith worketh by love, and love be the fulfilling of the law, then faith and the fulfilling of the law must needs go together. Thus St.John tells us, Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God , 1 John v. 1. And the same apostle tells us in the same Epistle, Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin , 1 John iii. 9. And if whosoever truly believes is born of God, and whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin, then whosoever truly believes doth not com¬ mit sin, and he that doth not commit sin must needs perform duty. And therefore St. Paul saith from God, or God by him, But if any one provide not for his own , and especially for them of his own house , he hath denied the faith , and is worse than an infidel , 1 Tim. v. 8. So that he that neglects his duty denies the faith, and he therefore that keeps his faith must needs perform his duty. He that doth really as well as seem¬ ingly believe will provide for his family; and he that doth not provide for his family doth not really but only seemingly believe; for he denies the faith , and is worse than an infidel. to expound what it was to walk with God, they translate it, Evijpeo-Tpo-e tco Qeco. And so when the like L I. phrase is used concerning Noah, m “pm-in nonban, Noah walked with God, Gen. vi. g, the Septua- gint render it again, T<3 6e® evrj- pearTTjcre Nae, the Syr. joi^l) caQj, And Noah pleased God. And so the Arabic too here. though not in the other place, ex- presseth it by xXU Et Noah placuit Deo. And thus though the words of the testimony of Enoch be not to be found in the original, yet the sense is, and the very words too, in these several translations. XII. Of Good Works. 303 For as St.John tells us, And every man that hath this hope in him purifies himself \ even as he is pure , 1 John iii. 3. So that he that hath a lively hope and saving faith in Christ purifies himself; and whosoever doth not purify himself, hath not that lively hope and saving faith in Christ. I shall name but one place more : For as the body without the spirit is dead , so faith without works is dead, also , James ii. 26. And if faith without works be dead, be sure no saving justifying faith can be with¬ out works; for every saving faith is a living faith, yea, there¬ fore living because saving, and therefore saving because living. Now if all faith without works be dead, and all saving faith is alive, it must needs follow that all saving faith hath works necessarily proceeding from it: for if it hath not, it would be a dead, and so no saving faith. Having grounded these truths upon scripture, we might clear them from reason; but as for the first, it is clear of itself, that good works are pleasing unto God, for it is his will they should be done, and therefore cannot but be his pleasure when done. He hath commanded them to be performed by us, and therefore when performed cannot but accept of them from us. For that which is of his commanding cannot but be of his accepting. And to this we might consider also, how it is he alone who doth not only command good works to be performed by us, but doth himself perform his own command¬ ments in us. So that there is nothing done by us for God, but is done by God in us. We can sin of ourselves, and so be offensive to him d ; but we cannot be good of ourselves, unless we be assisted by him. For he e being the chiefest good, there d Quapropter multa Deus facit in homine bona quae non facit homo; nulla vero facit homo quae non facit Deus ut faciat homo. Aug. contra duas epist. Pelag. 1 . 2. [21. vol. X.] Quid est enim boni cupiditas, nisi charitas, de qua Johannes apostolus sine ambiguitate loquitur dicens, Charitas ex Deo est. Nec initium ejus ex nobis et perfectio ejus ex Deo, sed si charitas ex Deo, tota nobis ex Deo est. Ibid. Bona quan- tacunque quamvis magna quamvis minima nisi ex Deo esse non pos- sunt. Id. de vera innocent, c. [380. vol. X. p. 251. App.] Non solum magna sed etiam minima bona non esse posse nisi ab illo, a quo sunt omnia bona, id est a Deo. Id. in ar¬ gument. ad lib. de libero arbitrio. [p. 567. vol. I.] Et quia quaecun- que nobis facienda donat, sicut ha¬ bere non possumus, nisi ipse nobis largiatur, sic facere non possumus, nisi ipse nobis quae largitus est ope- retur. Fulg. ad Mon. 1 .1. [14.] e Omnis infidelium vita peccatum est, et nihil est bonum sine summo 304 Of Good WorJcs. Art. can be no good in any thing or action but what proceeds from him ; and seeing he himself is the first mover of all our actions, and the only cause of all the good in them, certainly he cannot but be well pleased with them: for otherwise he would not be well pleased with his own actions, which he cannot but be well pleased with, nothing coming from him but what is infinitely pleasing to him. Nay, in that they are good, himself must needs be in them, and therefore he must needs be pleased with them, himself being all pleasure and happiness to himself. And that these good works do necessarily spring from faith is as clear, in that faith is an uniting grace, that unites Christ to us and us to Christ; so that by faith we dwell in Christ and Christ dwells in us; as the apostle saith, That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith , Eph. iii. 17. Now wheresoever any of Christ is, there all of Christ is; and therefore if Christ dwell in us, the Spirit of Christ must needs dwell in us too; and where the Spirit of Christ is, there is the principle and fountain of all good works, which cannot but issue forth acts of piety towards God and charity towards our neighbour. But I needed not to have gone so far to have proved, that every one that hath true faith hath the Spirit of God ; for a man must have the Spirit of God before he can have true faith. f For the Spirit doth not first work faith in us, and then come itself to us, but it first cometh itself to us, and then worketh faith in us. So that he that believes must needs have the Spirit; for unless he had the Spirit he could not believe. And where the Spirit of God is, there is the spring of goodness, from whence the streams of goodness must needs flow. So that he that saith a man may believe and not do good works, must either say a man may believe and yet not have the Spirit, or that a man may have the Spirit in him and yet good works not be performed by him: which cannot be, for in that it is a Spirit, it is an active principle always bono. Aug. de vera innocentia, c. literas Pelag. 1 . 2. [21. vol. X.] 106. [vol. X. p. 230. App.] Proinde f Non ergo Spiritum Sanctum cupiditas boni non homini a Domino quia credimus, sed ut crederemus esset si bonum non esset. Si autem accepimus. Fulg. de incarn. et grat. bonum est, non nisi ab illo nobis Christi, [cap. 17.40.] Liberavit au- est qui summe atqiie incommuta- tem non in quolibet homine fidem biliter bonus est. Id. contra duas inveniendo sed dando. Ibid. [34.] XII. Of Good Works. 305 doing; and in that it is the Spirit of God, it is a holy prin¬ ciple, and therefore must always be doing good. Neither were these truths unheard of, or not consented to by the Fathers. Let these few speak for the rest. First, for good works, that they are pleasing unto God, Clemens Ito- manus having asserted the truth delivered in the former article, that we are justified by faith only, (as we may there see him quoted,) he presently adds what is asserted in this, saying, s “ What therefore shall we do, brethren ? Shall we cease from doing good, and leave off love and charity ? The Lord will by no means suffer that to be done by us; but let us haste with all diligence and alacrity to perfect every good work : for the Creator himself and Lord of all things rejoiceth in his own works." And Irenteus, having rehearsed the principal articles of the Christian faith, saith, h “ This faith they that have believed without learning, as to our language they are barbarous, but as to their judgment, custom, and conversation, by reason of their faith, they are very wise, and please God, having their conversation in righteousness, chastity, and wisdom. So that to have our conversation in righteousness, chastity, and wisdom is to please God." So Justin tells us, 1 “ They that do such things as are universally, naturally, and eternally good are wellpleasing unto God." St. Hilary speaks fully to the purpose : k “ But our works," saith he, “ must be lift up unto the holy things of God, that is, in clothing the naked, in feeding the hungry, in giving £ Tt ovv noirjcrwpev ct8e\(j)ol; ap- yaacopev ano rrjs dyadonouas, x.a\ eyKaTa\elna>p.ev tt)v dydnrjv ; prjda- pcos tovto tacrai 6 decrnoTrjs e(f) pplv yevvrjdrjvai, dWa anevcrcopeu per eKTevelas Kal npoOvpias nctv epyov ayaOov eVrireAet v' avros yap 6 8rj- ptovpybs koI deanoTijs tcov cinavrcov en\ rots epyois avrov dyaWiarai. Clem. ep. ad Corinth. [33.] 11 Hanc fidem qui sine literis cre- diderunt, quantum ad sermonem nostrum barbari sunt, quantum au- tem ad sententiam, et consuetudi- nem, et conversationem propter fi¬ dem perquam sapientissimi sunt, et placent Deo, conversantes in omni justitia, castitate et sapientia. Iren, adv. hseres. 1. 3. c. 4. [2.] i ’E7ret ot rd KaSoXov, Ka'i (fivcrei, Ka\ alcovLa Ka\d inoiovv , evapearoi tlcn tco Qeco. Justin, dialog, cum Tryph. Jud. [45.] k Elevanda autem opera nostra sunt in Dei sancta, id est, in nudis vestiendis, in esurientibus cibandis, in sitientibus potandis, in afflictis consolandis, in oppressis adjuvandis, in omnibus diligendis. Haec enim nos in hac corporis infirmitate sanc- tificant, haec Deo placent et sancta sunt. Hilar, enar. in Psa. 133. [5.] BEVERIDGE. X 306 Of Good Works. Art. drink to the thirsty, in comforting the afflicted, in helping the oppressed, in loving all. For these things sanctify us in the frailty of our body; these things please God, and are holy.” And Theophilus Antiochenus saith, 1 44 He under- standeth all these things who inquireth into the wisdom of God, studying to please him by faith, righteousness, and good works/ 1 But I need not produce any more witnesses for the confirmation of so clear a truth. And that faith and works always go together the Fathers are also express. As Origen : m 44 And this faith when it is justified sticks in the ground of the soul as a root that hath received the shower into it, that when it begins to be tilled by the law of God the branches may rise from it that bear the fruit of good works. The root of righteousness therefore doth not grow from works, but the fruit of works from the root of righteousness, to wit, that root of righteousness whereby God accepts of righteousness without works, viz. faith. 1 ’ And St. Augustine to the same purpose : n 44 Faith is in the soul as a good root, which turns the rain into fruit. 1 ’ And therefore doth Polycarp tell the Philippians, ° 44 And that the firmness of your faith remaineth from the beginning until now, and bringeth forth fruit in the Lord Jesus Christ.” And Clemens Alexandrinus, p 44 Charity with love to faith makes believers, but faith is the foundation of charity, bring¬ ing forth welldoing.” So Proclus, speaking of faith and charity, saith, 1“ They 1 Haec omnia intelligit qui Dei sapientiam exquirit, studens ei pla- cere per fidem, jnstitiam et bona opera. Theoph. Antioch, ad Autolic. 1. 2. fin. m Et haec fides cum justificata fuerit, tanquam radix imbre suscepto haeret in animae solo, ut cum per legem Dei excoli coeperit, surgant in eo rami qui fructus operum ferunt. Non ergo ex operibus radix justitiae, sed ex radice justitiae fructus operum crescit, ilia scilicet radice justitiae, qua Deus accepto fert justitiam sine operibus. Origen. in Rom. 1 . 4. [vol. IV. p. 523.] n Fides sic est in anima ut radix bona quae pluviam in fructum ducit. Aug. praef. in Psa. 139. init. [vol. IV *] . „ 0 Et quia firmitas fidei vestrae a principio usque nunc permanet et fructificat in Domino Jesu Christo. Polycarp, epist. ad Philip, [p. 14.J P 'H pev dyaTTTj rrj rrpos rrjv tvlcttlv TOVS TTICTTOVS TTOul' T) 8e TTICTTIS eftpacrpa dydnrjs dvreirdyovaa rrjv ev- iroiiav. Clem. Alex. Strom. 2. [p. 445-] Q E Karepa tolwv aWr/Xais avp- ft alvei’ r) pev yap 7tI(ttis eaonrpov ea-Tiv dydnijs, f) 8e dyanr] ft eft at co¬ ats vnapxet nlarecos. Procl. in Ar¬ men. [Bibl. Vet. Patr. fol. Par. 1624. vol. I. p. 311.] XII. Of Good Works. 307 both go together; for faith is the glass of charity, and charity is the foundation of faith. 1 ’ So Prosper! r “ Faith, which is the foundation of righteousness, which no good works precede, from which all good works proceed, itself purgeth us from sin, enlightens our minds, reconciles us to God, associates us with all that are partakers of our nature, inspires into us the hope of the future reward, increaseth in us holy virtues, and confirms us in the possession of them. 11 Who can speak more fully and clearly to the case in hand \ I shall add but two more; viz. Salvian : 8 “ Seeing, as we have said, this is the faith of a Christian, faithfully to keep the commands of Christ; it is so without all doubt, that he hath no faith that is an infidel, neither doth he believe in Christ that tramples upon the commands of Christ; and therefore he that doth believe cannot but obey them. 11 And St. Chrysostome : As soon as ever thou believest, thou wilt be adorned also with good works. Not because it is wanting to other works, but because faith is of itself full of good works. 11 And thus we see how faith is the root of works, and works the fruit of faith; and therefore we cannot but conclude, that faith may be as evidently known by its works as a tree is discerned by the fruit. r Fides quae est justitiae funda- mentum quam nulla bona opera praecedunt, et ex qua omnia pro- cedunt, ipsa nos a peccatis purgat, mentes nostras illuminat, Deo re- conciliat, cunctis participibus naturae nostrae consociat, spem nobis futurae remunerationis inspirat, auget in nobis virtutes sanctas, ac nos in ea- rum possessione confirmat. Prosper, de vita contemplat. [ 1 . III.] c. 21. 8 Cum ut diximus hoc sit hominis Christiani fides, fideliter Christi man- data servare, fit absque dubio ut nec fidem habeat qui infidelis est, nec Christum credat qui Christi man- data conculcat. Salvian. de provid. 1. 4. [init.] t O vk ovv apa inierreveras apa kcu tols epyois cko/xt) eras' ov\ oti Kal eX- Xeinr] Tvpos ra epya, aXX’ on KaS ’ iavTrjV TTLerns nXrjprjs icrnv ayaOeov epyeov. Chrysost. 7 repl irlarTeeos Ka\ els rov nepl (fivereeos vopov, tom. VI* p. 838. ARTICLE XIIL OF WORKS BEFORE JUSTIFICATION. Works done before the grace of Christ , and the inspira¬ tion of his Spirit , are not pleasant to God , forasmuch as they spring not out of faith in Jesu Christ , neither do they make men meet to receive grace , or (as the school authors say) deserve grace of congruity: yea rather , for that they are not done as God hath willed and commanded them to be done , we doubt not but they have the nature of sin. A S man was created by God, he had power so to continue in the state of integrity 11 that he had power also to fall down into a state of sin and misery; but as he was corrupted in Adam, he hath power to continue in his state of sin and misery, but no power of himself to rise up again into a state of holiness and integrity. Then his will was free, both to the good and evil; now it is free to the evil, not to the good. Then he could have chosen whether he would have sinned or a Firmissime tene et nullatenus dubites primos homines, id est, Adam et mulierem ejus bonos et rectos et sine peccato creatos esse cum libero arbitrio, quo possent si vellent humili et bona voluntate ser- vire atque obedire, quo arbitrio etiam possent si vellent propria voluntate peccare, eosque non necessitate sed propria voluntate peccasse. Aug. de fide ad Petrum, 21. [68. vol. VI. App.] Quapropter bina ista quid inter se differant diligenter et vigi- lanter intuendum est, posse non peccare, et non posse peccare; posse non mori, et non posse mori ; bonum posse non deserere, et bonum non posse deserere. Potuit enim non peccare primus homo, potuit non mori, potuit bonum non deserere : nunquid dicturi sumus non potuit peccare qui tale habebat liberum arbitrium ? Id. de corrept. et grat. [33. vol. X.J Credimus itaque bo¬ num et sine ulla carnis impugnatione a creatore omnium factum Adam, magnaque prseditum libertate, ita ut et bonum facere in propria facultate haberet, et malum si vellet posset admittere. Fulgent, de incarn. et grat. Christi. [epist. xvi. 15.] Art. XIII. Of Works before Justification. 809 no ; now of himself he cannot choose but sin, or he can choose nothing but sin. After our creation and before our corruption, we had power to do every thing pleasing unto God; but after our corruption and before our regeneration, we have power to do nothing pleasing unto God. Though we have power to do such things as in themselves are pleasing unto God, yet we have not power so to do those things that our doing them should be pleasing unto him. The matter of the actions we do may be accepted, but our manner of doing them is still rejected. Because though we do the thing that God commands of ourselves, yet we can never do it in the way that God commands. And hence it is here said, that there is nothing that we do before we receive grace can make us meet to receive grace, or, as the schoolmen say, “ deserve grace of b congruity that is, we can do nothing for which it is so much as meet that God should bestow any thing upon us. As we cannot do any thing which it is just God should reward, and so deserve grace of condignity; so neither can we do any thing which it is fit or meet God should reward, and so deserve grace of congruity. So that God should not do what is unmeet and unfitting to be done, though he never reward any of the works of mere natural men. And the reason is clearly here asserted, Because they have all the nature of sin. And if they have the nature of sin and iniquity, certainly they cannot deserve grace of congruity. So that it cannot be meet that God should reward them, nay, it is rather meet he should not reward them. Nay, it is not only meet he should not reward them, but it is meet and just too that he should punish them 0 ; justice requiring sin to be punished as well as b Congruum est opus cui de justitia non debeatur merces, sed tamen ex congruitate quadam. Soto de nat. et gratia, 1 . 2. c. 4. Nempe si doctioribus creditur, illud dicitur esse meritum de condigno, cui mer¬ ces reddenda est secundum justitiae debitum, ita sane ut inter meritum et mercedem attendatur aequalitas quantitatis, quemadmodum in com- mutativa justitia tantum quantum. De congruo autem dicitur quis me- reri, cum scilicet inter meritum et praemium non paritas quantitatis sed proportionis dicitur. Romaeus. [p. i 6 3 * c ] / , , c ‘Ov'iov twv KaXki(TTO)V fjiovov icrriv r) evyv(Ofxo(Tvvr] kci'i dnodocns' rov 8e 8ikluov Kal rj twv kcikmv 8oKifxacria kciI dvTanu 8 o(ris• Basil. Reg. brevior, interrog. 249. [vol. 11.] 310 Of Works before Justification , Art. virtue to be rewarded: and therefore if thy works be sins, they cannot in justice be rewarded, but punished. But the only question here to be determined, is, whether they be indeed sins or no. For if they be sins, there is nothing in this article but must be acknowledged for a real truth. For here it is asserted, that works before grace are not pleasing unto God, which if they be sins they surely can¬ not be ; for he can be pleased with nothing but what is con¬ formable to his will and nature; yea, therefore, because any thing is conformable to his will and nature he is pleased with it. But sin is so far from being conformable, that it is flat contrary to both. So that so long as he is God he cannot but hate sin, and to be pleased with sin would be to act con¬ trary to himself. And as if the works of sinners be all sin they cannot be pleasing unto God, so neither can they deserve any thing from him but punishments. For in that they dis¬ please him, they must needs deserve his displeasure; and in that they deserve his displeasure, they must needs deserve the greatest of punishments, his displeasure itself being the greatest of punishments. But now that all the works of un¬ regenerate men are indeed sins, appears both from scripture, reason, and Fathers. As for the scripture, it tells us, The 'plowing of the wicked is sin, Prov. xxi. 4 ; yea, The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomi¬ nation to the Lord , ch. xv. 8. And d again, The sacrifice of the d The ancient translations all carry the sense in this place another way. The words in the original are, rut non u minn which the Vulg. translates, Hostile impiorum abominabiles, quia offerun- tur ex scelere. And so the LXX, Ovauu dcrefidiv fibeXvypa K.vplq>, kcu yap Trapavopoos npoacpepovcnv avras , which the Arabic follows Kara iroba : and so the Syriac, Pa-X? OOl oi^, i. e. The sacrifice of the wicked is unclean , because they ojfer it wick¬ edly : and so indeed the Targum too, mV »n»o Nmum Vudd, because they offer it in wickedness. So that they all took u rjN to signify se¬ verally et quia • whereas when they come together in a negative sentence they signify quanto minus j as. The heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain thee , run nun u how much less this house that I have built? i Reg. viii. 27. In an affirm¬ ative sentence, quanto magis j as. Behold, the righteous shall be recom-, pensed in the earth, stiim 9 tin n q**, how much more the wicked and the sinner ? Prov. xi. 31; \yhich the LXX. translates, Ei 6 pev dlsaios poXis crco^eraL, 6 daeftrjs sal dpapra)- Xos 7 tov (faveirai ; And it is observ¬ able, that not only the Syriac and Arabic translations, but the apostle Peter himself, in his quotation of XIIT. Of Works before Justification. 311 wicked is an abomination : how much more, when he bringeth it with a wicked mind ? ch. xxi. 27. So that though he should possibly bring it with a good mind, yet, seeing he is a wicked man that brings it, it is an abomination to the Lord. And therefore he saith, I hate, I despise your feast-days, and I will not smell in your solemn assemblies. Though you offer me burnt- offerings , and your meat-offerings, I will not accept them : neither will I regard the peace-offerings of your fat beasts. Amos v. 21, 22. He that killeth an ox is as if he slew a man ; lie that sacri¬ ficed a lamb, as if he cut off a dog's neck ; he that offered an oblation, as if he offered swine's blood; he that burned incense, as if he blessed an idol. Yea, they have chosen their own ways, and their soul delighted in their abominations. Isa. lxvi. 3. To what purpose therefore cometh there to me incense from Shebah ? and the sweet cane from a far country ? your burnt-offerings are not acceptable , nor your sacrifices sweet unto me. Jer. vi. 20. To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me ? saith the Lord: I am full of the burnt-offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts ; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs , or of he-goats. When you come to appear before me, who hath required this at your hands, to tread my courts ? Bring no more vain oblations ; incense is an abomination unto me ; and the new moons and sabbaths , the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquityfeven your solemn meetings. Isa. i. 11,12,13. And the reason is because, As it is written , There is none righteous , no, not one: there is none that under- standeth, none that seeketli after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are altogether become unprofitable; there is none that doth good, no, not one. Rom. iii. 10, 11, 12. Not one of those that are bad persons can do any good actions : but the best of their performances, as well as the worst of their iniquities, is an abomination to the Lord. Neither doth reason itself contradict this truth. For this place, doth not follow the ori- gether in the original, our translators ginal, but the LXX, though here cannot be condemned, but com- they much differ from it, Kai el 6 mended, for leaving the translations 8lkcuos fio\is crco^erat, 6 d(re(3f)S kcu to stick to the text itself, in this as apaprcciXos nov (pavelrai; i Pet.iv.i8. in other places, [and] rendering the Now this being the right notion of phrase '3 rjs here, as it denotes ’3 whensoever they come to- elsewhere, even how much more. 312 Of Works before Justification. Art. reason itself, as well as scripture, saith, that c a corrupt tree cannot bring forth good fruit, Matt. vii. 18 ; nay, a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit, ver. 17. As the tree is upon which the fruit grows, so will the fruit be that grows upon that tree. If the tree be good, the fruit cannot be bad; and if the tree be bad, the fruit cannot be good. And so if a man’s person be righteous, his actions will be holy; but his actions cannot but be sinful if his person be wicked. For it is the person that doth the actions whom Grod looks at in the first place, and then at the action that is done by the person. And therefore though the action be in itself good that the person doth, yet if the person be bad that doth the action, the action cannot but be bad too, as well as the person. For though the righteousness of a man’s person can never make a bad action good, yet the wickedness of a man’s person doth always make a good action bad. And therefore though a good man may do a bad act, yet a bad man can never do a good act. But neither is the person only of a wicked man rejected, but his actions are also deficient; and if they be defective in any one thing, that is enough to denominate them sins. An action cannot be good unless it be perfect in all things; but an action is bad that is defective but in one thing. But now how many things are there that all the actions of wicked men are defective in? There are two things especially they are defective in. And the first is that named in this article, even that they do not spring from faith in Jesus Christ. And the apostle tells us, that without faith it is impossible to please God, Heb. xi. 6. For whatsoever is not of faith is sin, Rom. xiv. 23. Now that a wicked man hath not faith is clear, in that if he had faith he would not be a wicked man. For faith empties the heart of sin, and fills it up with grace. Faith justifies our persons, and sanctifies our natures. By faith we are accounted e Istae duae arbores manifestissime in similitudine duorum hominum positae sunt, id est justi et injusti; quia nisi quisquam voluntatem mu- taverit, bonum operari non potest. Aug. contra Adimant. Manichaeiun, c. 26. [vol. VIII. p. 147.] *0 Se Xpiaros ov tovto Xeyei, on rbv Trovrj- pov ciprj-^avov peraftaWeaQai, rj rbv dyaObv dbvvarov p-ercnrecrelv, dXX on ecos av f] Trovrjpia crv^cov, ov dvvrjcreTcu KapTibv dyaOov eveyicelv' p.era[3aX\e lv pev yap els dpen)v Svvarai novr)pbs cov, pevcov 8e ev novrjpla Kapnov ovk o’laei koXov. Chrysost. in loc. [vol. II. p. 168.] XIII. Of Works before Justification. 313 righteous before God, and made righteous by him. And therefore he that had true faith can be no wicked man: and therefore also every wicked man can have no faith; and if he hath not faith, he cannot but sin against God, as the f Fathers long ago preached. And again, as what a wicked man doth is a sin, because not proceeding from faith, Sso it is a sin also in that it is not directed to a right end : for a bad intention always makes even a good action bad, though a good intention can never make a bad action good. Now that all wicked men have wicked ends in all their actions is manifest, in that they are wicked men, men without the true knowledge of God, and men without the sincere love unto God. Now all such as do not truly know and love the God of glory can never sincerely aim at the glory of God in what f Sunt quippe isti fideles, aut si fidem non habent Christi, profecto nec justi sunt, nec Deo placent, cum sine fide placere impossibile est. Aug. contra Julian. Pel. 1 . iv. [25. vol. X.] Si gentilis, inquis, nudum operuerit, nunquid quia non est ex fide, peccatum est ? Prorsus in quantum non est ex fide peccatum est: non quia per seipsum factum, quod est nudum operire, peccatum est; sed de tali opere non in Do¬ mino gloriari solus impius negat esse peccatum. Ibid. [30.] Omne enim, velis nolis, quod non est ex fide peccatum est. Ibid. [32.] 'H 7TLCTTIS TOP €TVLCTTpecjj6pePOP 7ToXLTrjP ovpapcbp inrobe'iKvvaLv’ rj Tvians top curb yrjs apdpconop Qeov avpopiXop (iTTepya^TaC ovbep £ ToXpciopTt 8e8r)XeoTat’ 8c orrep 7 rapa- koXco, wff 8i8acTKei 6 K vpcos, 7 Tou']aco- p.ev to 8ep8pop KaXop, Kal top Kapnop CIVTOV KaXoP, KCU Kadapl(TCOp.€V 7Tpcb - TOP TO CPTOS TOV TTOTTJpLOV Kal Ttjs 7rapo\^c8os, Kal Tore to cktos avTov ccrTac KaOapop oXop‘ Kal 81a tov cltvo- cttoXov 7 Tai8ev6ePTCS, Kadaplacopcp eavTOvs dno napros po\vcrp,ov crapKos Kill TTPCVpaTOS, Kal TOT6 CTUTeXcbpCP ayuoavprjp ip dyantj XpccrTOv, cpa cvdpecTTOC 0ec5, Kal €imp6cr8cKTOt t tovto 6(pelXei‘ el ycip prj epyaatj- rai ^nXrjycov a^Lcoreos' ene i 8e elpya- craTO, dpKelaOco otl ras 7 rXrjyas e^ecf)v- yev' ov p.rj v be[Xei erri rovrat Tip-rjv Crjrelv avayKalcos. Theophyl. in LllC. 17. [p. 466.] XIV. Of Works of Supererogation. parable of the labourers in the vineyard, he that came in at the last hour had his penny as well as he that came in at the first, Matt. xx. 9, 10 : plainly shewing 11 s, that they that had borne the heat of the day, the heat of temptations, the heat of afflictions, the heat of persecutions, yet had not done any more than what it was their duty to do; they were still unprofitable servants, and had deserved no more than they that coming not in till the last hour underwent none of these, and that was nothing at all. But we need not heap up arguments in so plain a truth : for how is it possible that any one should do more good works than are commanded, when nothing is a good work but what is commanded, nay, and therefore only, because it is commanded, it is a good work ? It is God's command that is the ground of all duty. And what is the ground of duty to me, is the ground of acceptance with him. And therefore is there nothing that God will accept as good from me, but what himself hath commanded to me. These voluntary works therefore, which they call works of supererogation, are they commanded by God or not? If they be commanded, it is my duty to perform them, and so they are not superero¬ gatory ; and I should sin if I do not do them : if they be not commanded, it is my duty not to perform them; and so I should sin if I do them. How then shall I do more good works than it is my duty to do, seeing what it is not my duty to do cannot be any good work ? We may see this evidently in the Jews, in their over-multiplied fasts and uncommanded sacrifices, which they might have accounted as so many works of supererogation, wherein they thought they did God good service : yet what saith he ? Who hath required these things at your hands ? Is. i. 12. And thus doth he say of all works, besides and above his commands, Who hath required these at your hands ? As if he should say, I never commanded these things to you, and therefore will never accept of them from you. And thus are all these works of supererogation not good and accepted, because not commanded works; and therefore it is impossible that any more good works should be performed by us than what is commanded, seeing nothing that is not commanded can be a good work. BEVERIDGE. V 3%2 Of Works of Supererogation. Art. But I would willingly know what necessity there is of such works of supererogation ? Are they necessary for the satisfac¬ tion for their own sins? No; for then they are not works of supererogation : what need therefore is there of them ? Are they needful for the satisfying for other men’s sins ? I know the great maintainers f of this opinion, being loath to say these works are altogether superfluous, adjudge them necessary for others, though not for themselves who do perform them, making them copartners with Christ, in making satisfaction for the sins of others. But what is this but blasphemously to debase the merits of Christ to exalt their own, and to make the good works (I might say the sins) of finite creatures to be of the like value with the blood of the Son of God ? But I would wish all such but seriously to consider with themselves, whether they think in their consciences that one mere man may satisfy for another’s sins, or whether at the day of judgment what one man hath done shall be rewarded in another? I am sure the apostle tells us, We must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ , that every one may receive the things done in his body , according to what he hath done , whether it be good or evil , 2 Cor. v. 10: and, Every man shall bear his own burden , Gal. vi. 5 : and, Every man shall receive his own reward , according to his own labour , 1 Cor. iii. 8 : so that the father shall not there be punished for the son’s iniquity, nor the son rewarded for the father’s piety; but every one shall stand upon his own legs; s in the same condition he died f Let us hear one of their own rabbies. Ilsec satisfactio redundans quorsum evadit ? Quum mortuus est Christus, et prseter Christum cum Maria Virgo, et Petrus, et Paulus, et innumeri praeterea alii sancti mortem obierunt, tot operibus redundantis satisfactionis cumulati, quandoquidem ilia non intulerunt in caelum ubi nullus est satisfaciendi locus, opera ilia quonam abierunt ? &c. Si egomet, auditores, dicerem abjici et supervacaneum esse (opus illud supererogatorium) vererer ne me lapidibus obruendum censeretis. Et merito quidem: nam nulla ratione dicendum est, quicquam in ecclesia Dei vel deesse vel supervacaneum esse. Et sane impium esset si quis crederet rein tarn puram tantamque, quanta est satisfactio pro peccatis, vento dissipari et evanescere. Quis igitur eorum operum est usus ? O admirabilem Dei providentiam ! Ex iis conflatur communio ilia sancto¬ rum. Panigorol. [Discept. Calvin, p. 275.] So that it seems, according to him, these works of superero¬ gation, though they do him that performed them no good, yet others get much benefit from them, as well as from the satisfactions wrought by Christ. £ In quo quemque invenerit suus XIV. OfW orks of Supererogation. 823 before, he must now be judged. And if so, what will become of the works of supererogation ? What need is there that any one should perform them, seeing himself stands not in need of them, neither can any one else receive any profit from them, by having satisfaction made for their sins by them ? But as he that lives and dies in holiness shall not be prejudiced by other men’s sins ; so he that lives and dies in sins shall not be any way profited by other men’s holiness. Though there have been many that have done and suffered much for the sake of Christ, yea, unto death itself; yet it is not the torments of their death that can satisfy for the sins of another’s life. No, it is Christ, and Christ h alone, we are to expect this satisfaction from. What he did, he did of merit, not of duty ; but what all others do, they do of duty, not of merit. Them¬ selves were bound to it, and therefore they cannot advantage others by it. And if they will not believe us, let them hearken to the Fathers. St. Basil saith, i “ For no man is able to persuade the Devil to let go one out of his power, whom he hath once gotten into it. And he that cannot make satisfaction, or propitiate God for his own sins, how can he do it for another?” The like to which I find in the Commentary upon St. Matthew, ascribed to St. Chrysostome : k “ If therefore the glory that is novissimus dies, in hoc eum com- prehendet mundi novissimus dies: quoniam qualis in die isto quisque moritur, talis in illo judicabitur. August. Epist. [199. 2. vol. II.] Tunc cuique veniet dies ille cum ve- nerit ei dies, ut talis hinc exeat, qualis judicandus est illo die. Ac per hoc vigilare debet omnis Christ- ianus, ne imparatum eum inveniat Domini adventus. Imparatum au- tem inveniet ille dies, quern impara¬ tum invenerit suae vitae hujus ulti- mus dies. Ibid. [3.] h Quod de uno solo mediatore Dei et bominum, homine Christo Jesu, catholica tides novit, quod pro nobis mortem, hoc est peccati poe- nam, sine peccato subire dignatus est. Sicut enim solus ideo factus est hominis Alius ut nos per ilium Dei filii fieremus ; ita solus pro nobis suscepit sine malis meritis pcenam, ut nos per ilium sine bonis meritis consequeremur gratiam. Aug. contra duas epist. Pelag. 1 . 4. [6. vol. X.] 1 ’'ApOpamos yap ovde'is Svparbs eVrt nelcrai top 8lu[3o\oi> npos to top ana£ avrq> vnoTreaopTa etjeXecrOai ana rrjs e^ovaias' os ye ovde nep'i tcop Idiujp apapTrjpaToop, oios re ecrrt i^’Ckaapa dovpai ro5 0e<», 7rcos ovp tcryvcret tovto bnep erepov npa^ai : Basil, in Psal. 48. [vol. I. p. 239.] k Si ergo major est gloria quae praeparata est sanctis a Deo, quam quod unusquisque sanctorum mere- tur, quomodo sufficiat et aliis ad salutem uniuscujusque opus eorum, cum nec sibi soli sufficiat ad gloriam illam justo judicio consequendam ? Opus imperfect, in Mat. horn. 52. [vol. VII. p. 967. ed. Pari] Y 2 324 Art. Of Works of Supererogation. prepared for the saints by God be greater than every one of the saints deserve, how can their work suffice others also for their salvation, when it is not sufficient for themselves for the attainment of that glory by just judgment f 1 Clearly implying that the saints cannot do as much as they ought to do for themselves; and then how can they do any thing for others ? To the same purpose also speaks Leo : 1 “ Though the death of many of his saints be precious in the sight of God, yet the death of any of these innocent persons was not the propitia¬ tion of the world. The righteous persons do receive crowns, not give them. And from the courage of the faithful exam¬ ples of patience do arise, not the gifts of righteousness. For the death of them all were single deaths, neither did any of them pay another mans debts by his end : seeing amongst the children of men there is none but the Lord Jesus Christ only in whom all are crucified, all dead, all buried, all are raised up at the last day."’’ So that there is no righteousness or satisfaction to be had from the actions and passions of any, but only Christ. And so St. Augustine : m “ Neither is this so spoken, as if we could be equal to the Lord Christ, if we suffer martyrdom for him even unto blood. For he had power to lay down his life, and he had power to take it up again : but we neither live as long as we would, and die although we would not, &c. Lastly, brethren may die for brethren, yet the blood of any martyr is not poured out for the forgiveness and remission of their brethren's sins as he did for us." What could be spoken more fully to the purpose ? Our adversaries say that 1 Quamvis multorum sanctorum in conspectu Domini pretiosa mors fuerit, nullius tamen insontis occisio propitiatio fuit mundi. Acceperunt justi, non dederunt coronas, et de fortitudine fidelium nata sunt exem- pla patientiae, non dona justitiae. Singulares quippe in singulis mortes fuerunt, nec alterius quisquam de- bitum suo fine persolvit. Cum inter filios hominum unus solus Dominus noster Jesus Christus extiterit, in quo omnes crucifixi, omnes mortui, omnes sepulti, omnes sunt etiam suscitati. Leo Epist. [97. c. 4.] ad Palaestin.et Serm. 12. de passione. m Neque hoc ita dictum est quasi propterea Domino Christo pares esse possimus, si pro illo usque ad san- guinem martyrium duxerimus. Ille potestatem habuit ponendi animam suam et iterum sumendi earn. Nos autem nec quantum volumus vivi- mus, et morimur etiamsi nolumus, &c. Postremo, etsi fratres pro fra- tribus moriantur, tamen in frater- norum peccatorum remissionem nul¬ lius sanguis martyris funditur, quod fecit ille pro nobis. Aug. in Joh. tract. 84. [2. vol. III.] XIV. Of Works of Supererogation. 3 C 25 many of the saints, especially the martyrs, do and suffer more than they need, and what they do and suffer over and above God's command, (as martyrdom in particular,) is set upon others' scores, and applied to some of their brethren for the remission of their sins. But St. Augustine saith, There is no martyr but Christ suffereth death for the pardon of another's sins. In so clear a case it may suffice to produce one more witness, and that is St. Hilary, who, speaking of the Ten Virgins, five wise and five foolish, when the foolish came to the wise to borrow some of their oil; n “To whom," saith he, “ they answered, that they could not give them any, lest by chance there might not be enough for all; to wit, that no one can be helped by another's works and merits, because it is necessary that every one buy oil for his own lampand therefore can none have any oil, any grace, any works to spare over and above what himself needs, whereby the neces¬ sities of others may be supplied. So express are the Fathers in delivering the impossibility of one man's sins being satis¬ fied for by another's sufferings, and of one man's being sup¬ plied from another's merits. And that there is none that do more than is required, the Fathers clearly avouch, in saying, there is none can do so much as is required of him. For they shew how there is none lives without sin. And if they do not live without sin, they do not do as much as is required of them, for they do not avoid sin as they are commanded. And if they do not do as much as is required of them, certainly they cannot be said to do more than is commanded to them. Now that the Fathers do thus say, that there is no mere man without sin, we shall see in the next article: in the mean¬ while concluding from the premises, that works of supereroga¬ tion cannot be taught without arrogancy and impiety. n Quibus responderunt non posse dum : quia unicuique lampadi suae se dare, quia non sit forte quod om- emere oleum sit necesse. Hilar, in nibus satis sit. Alienis scilicet operi- Mat. cap. 27. [5.] bus ac meritis neminem adjuvan- ARTICLE XV. / OF CHRIST ALONE WITHOUT SIN. Christ in the truth of our nature ivas made like unto us in all things (sin only excepted) from which he was clearly void , both in his flesh and in his spirit. He came to be a Lamb without spot , who , by sacrifice of himself once made; should take away the sms of the world; and sin , as St.John saith , was not in him. But all we the rest , though baptized and born again in Christ , yet offend in many things; and if we say • we have no sin } we deceive ourselves , and the truth is not in us. W HEN the Son of God became the Son of man, he so became the Son of man as still to remain the Son of God. He did not lay aside his Divine nature to assume the human; but he assumed the human nature into the Divine, not as it was corrupted by sin, but as it was at first created by God. For as it was corrupted by sin, it was corrupted with the worst of evils, and therefore, as such, both unworthy and uncapable of being united to God, the best of goods. Who therefore assuming the human nature into the unity of his Divine Person, assumed only what was a worthy and capable of such assumption, to wit, the perfect nature of man as it was in its first creation, not as it was in its sinful cor- a 'O 8e pec tltijs Oeov iv 6 81 eavrov avvdnrcov rco 0 e <5 to dv- l L Opiomvov, eKeivo avvanrei povov onep dv rr/s rrpos Oeov (rvpffivias cii^iov rj' oxrnep ovv tov eavrov dvOpanrov rrj dvvdpei rr/s Oeorrjros eavra) rrpocroj)- Keuoae pepos pev rr/s icoivys (f)vae(os ovra, oil prjv rois TvaOecnv vironenrco- Kora rrjs (pverecos rois els dpapriav eKKCikovpevois, dpapriav yap, (Prjcr'iv, ovk enoiTjaev, ovde eiipeOrj 86\os ev rip aropan avrov. Greg. Nyssen. de perfecta Christi forma, [p. 202. vol. III.] Art. XV. Of Christ alone without Sin. 327 ruption. And so he that was perfectly God as well as per¬ fectly man, was a perfect man also as well as a perfect God. Because it was the perfect nature of man which he assumed from his mother in time, as it was the perfect nature of God which he received of his Father from eternity. And there¬ fore as he in the truth of the Divine nature was begotten like unto the Father in all things, his personal properties only excepted; so in the truth of the human nature he was made like unto us in all things, our sinful infirmities only excepted. He was in all things but sin like unto us; but in sin he was altogether unlike us. For we both in flesh and spirit are naturally full of sin, but b he was clearly void of sin both in his flesh and spirit. For he came to be a Lamb without spot, who by sacrifice of himself once made should take away the sins of the world: whereas had he been guilty of sin in himself, he could never have taken it away from us. For such a high priest became us , who is holy , harmless , undefiled , separate from sinners , and made higher than the heavens; who needed not daily , as those high priests , to ojfer up sacrifice first for his own sins , and then for the peoples. Heb. vii. 26, 27. And such a one was Christ; for in him , saith St. John, is no sin , 1 John iii. 5. Indeed sin doth not reign in the saints his members; but sin did not so much as dwell in him the Head. And as sin did not live in him, so neither did he live in sin; for he did no sin , neither was guile found in his mouth , 1 Pet. ii. 22. Isa. liii. 9- And therefore doth himself say, Which of you con¬ vinced me of sin? John viii. 46: and thus was he as clear from sin in his human nature as in his divine. As God, he was infinitely contrary unto sin ; and as man, he was perfectly void of it: yea he was therefore as man perfectly void of sin, b ’Eoikcv 6 it ai8ayu>yos ppwv tco apapria t] TT b^ r l > Basil, [vol. II. p. IlaTpl avTov to) 0 eo> ovnep ecrrlv 6 762.] de constitut. monast. c. 4. In vios dvapdprrjTos, dveniKrjTVTos, kcu hoc ergo ille homo qui natus ex dnadrjs ttjv y\r v xb v ' * v dvOpdoirov virgine est, magna cunctis qui ex axbpan d^pavros, TvarpiKcd 6e\rjp,a.Ti utriusque sexus commixtione pro- Slclkovos, A uyos 0eoy, 6 ev t<$ Tlarpl, ducimur distantia segregatin' : quod 6 8 e£ia)v tou II arpds, crvv KaXovaiv avrov, Kai ervi rravriov rovro 7 Toiovai, (fiiXonpiav nepi8eiKvvpevoi Ttepirrrjv, Kai 8ei^ai OeXovres, on pera 7 ToXXrjs avrqr emrarrovai rrjs etjovcrias. Chrysost. in Mat. hom. 44. [p. 287. vol. II.] ’ hvQpdmivov ri efiovXero evbe’JaerOai rj prjrqp, on e£ovfTu'Jei rov 7 raidos' ovdev yap peya ov7rco rrepi avrov evoei' did rovro ovv Ka\ en XaXovvra fiovXerai rrpos eav- rqv €7ria7idaaadai' (jnXoripovpevij d>s vnorarropevov avrfj rov viov. Theo- phylact. in Mat. 12. [ad fin.] But they blame her (and that worthily) the most for calling him then from doing good, which certainly she ought not to have done. Quia tunc multitudinem docebat, nec aequum erat ut hos relinqueret et ad matrem et fratres procurreret. Euthym. in Mat. 12. [p. 80.] 'Evvorjcrov yap oiov rjv, rvdvros rov Xaov Kai rov 8rjpov TvepiecrraiTos avrov, Kai rov rrXrjOovs rrjs ciKpodcreios eKKpepapevov, Kai rrjs 8i8aaKaXias irporeOeiaijs, eKeivrjv rvap- eXdovcrav pear/v drrayayeiv pev avrov rrjs Trapaivecrecos , 18Ui 8e 8iaXeyea6ai, Kai pr]8e ev8ov cive^ecrdai eXOeiv, dXX ’ eXKeiv avrov e£ povov npos eavrrjP' 8id rovro eXeye, ris ecrnv rj prjTqp pov Kai oi d8eX(poi pov ; Chrysost. in Job. hom. 21. [p. 639. vol. II.] d Item placuit quod ait S. Johan¬ nes apostolus. Si dixerimus quia peccatum non habemus nos ipsos seducimus et veritas in nobis non est, quisquis sic accipiendum puta- verit, ut dicat, propter humilitatem oportere dici, nos habere peccatum, non quia veritas est, anathema sit. Concil. Milevit. 2. can. 6. [p. 1218. vol. I.] 330 Of Christ alone without Sin. Art. gone out of the ivay , they are altogether become unprofitable; there is none that doth good , no, not one , ver. 10,11. Psalm xiv. 1, 2, 3. For as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men , for that all liare sinned , Rom. v. 12. For there is no man that sinneth not , 1 Reg. viii. 46. 2 Chron. vi. 36. Nay, There is not a just man upon earth , that doth good , awe? sinneth not , Eccles. vii. 20. JFor «w many things we ojfend all , Jac. iii. 2. WAo therefore caw say, / Aacc made my heart clean, I am pure from sin ? Prov. xx. 9. 0 enter not then into judgment with thy servant , 0 Lord: for in thy sight shall no man living be justified, Psalm cxliii. 2. And as the scripture doth thus assert, that all the men and women that ever lived upon the face of the earth, (Christ only excepted, who was God as well as man,) were sinners; so reason itself, if consulted aright, cannot but determine the same. Which any one may easily perceive that doth but con¬ sider how (as we have seen more fully in the ninth article) in Adam the whole human nature was corrupted, all sinning and being made sinners in him: for in him God said to all, In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt die the death. What death \ Certainly the death of the soul as well as the body; spiritual, consisting in the separation of the soul from God, as well as temporal death, that consisteth in the separation of the body from the soul. And so in Adam our souls were made sinful by the loss of God, as our bodies are made mortal by the loss of their souls e : sin passing from that one man into the souls, as well as death into the bodies of all mankind. And there¬ fore it is impossible that any particular person should be excepted from sin, seeing the whole nature is defiled with it : so that he must be no mere man that is no sinner. And therefore it is that our Saviour commanded all his disciples, his apostles, all his followers, to pray daily, f Forgive us our e Si quis soli Adae praevaricatio- nem suam, non et ejus propagini asserit nocuisse, ant certe mortem tantum corporis quae poena peccati est, non autem et peccatum quod mors est animae, per unum hominem in omne genus humanum transisse testatur, injustitiam Deo dabit con- tradicens apostolo. Concil. Arausic. 2. can. 2. [vol. II.] f Item placuit ut quicunque dixe- rit in oratione Dominica, ideo dicere sanctos, Dimitte nobis debita nostra, ut non pro seipsis hoc dicatur, quia non est eis jam necessaria ista petitio, sed pro aliis qui sunt in suo populo peccatores, et ideo non dicere unum- quemque sanctorum, Dimitte mihi XV. Of Christ alone without Sin. 331 trespasses , as we forgive them that trespass against us , Luke xi. 4: because from the fountain of sin in our hearts the streams of sin are continually flowing out in our lives, which we have need to beg daily of God to pardon, and forgive to ns, to all of us. And to this we may also take notice, how even the best of saints whilst on earth are but imperfect saints, their graces imperfect, their duties imperfect, their love imperfect, their charity imperfect, all imperfect. Which imperfection and de¬ fect in all their graces and duties, as it cannot be any more, so it is not any less than s sin, forasmuch as holiness is the exact conformity of the will of man to the will of God, and of the life of man to the laws of God; and how far soever any one lacks of the exactness of that conformity, so much he lacks of holiness ; and how much he lacks of holiness, so much he hath of sin. And therefore so far as grace and duty is imperfect in us, so far is sin and iniquity to be acknowledged by us. Now that our graces and duties are imperfect upon earth, is plain, in that to have our graces and duties perfect, is to be in heaven; perfection of grace being itself the crown of glory. And therefore, though there be many that have sin without grace, there is none that hath grace without sin in this world. But as the h Fathers long ago acknowledged, and debita mea, sed Dimitte nobis debita nostra, ut hoc pro aliis potius quam pro se justus petere intelligatur, ana¬ thema sit. Sanctus enim et justus erat apostolus Jacobus cumdicebat. In multis enim offendimus omnes. Concil. Milevit. 2. can. 7. [vol. I.] Item placuit ut quicumque verba ip¬ sa Dominicae orationis ubi dicimus, Dimitte nobis debita nostra, ita vo- lunt a sanctis dici ut humiliter non veraciter hoc dicatur, anathema sit. Ibid. can. 8. £ Virtus est charitas qua id quod diligendum est diligitur. Haec in aliis major, in aliis minor, in aliis nulla est; plenissima vero quae jam non potest augeri quamdiu hie homo vivit, est in nemine; quod autem augeri potest profecto illud quod minus est quam debet, ex vitio est. Aug. Epist. [167. 15. vol. II.] ad Hieronymum. Peccatum est cum vel non est charitas, vel minor est quam debet. Id. de perfect, justi- tise. [15. vol. X.] h Ut enim saepe diximus, omnis humana justitia injustitia esse con- vincitur, si districte judicetur. Greg. Moral. 1 . 9. [28. vol. I.] Nostra si qua est humilis justitia, recta forsan sed non pura, nisi forte meliores nos esse credimus quam patres no¬ stros, qui non minus veraciter quam humiliter dicebant, omnes justitiae nostrae tanquam pannus menstruatae mulieris. Quomodo enim pura jus¬ titia ubi non potest adhuc culpa de- esse ? Bernard, de verbis Esai. serm. 5. [p. 405.] Ex quo factum est vir- tutem quae nunc est in homine justo perfectam hactenus nominari, ut ad ejus perfectionem pertineat etiam ipsius imperfectionis et in veritate 332 Of Christ alone without Sin. Art. as we all do daily experience, our graces and duties are all imperfect, and so far as they are imperfect they must needs be sinful; not as if the imperfect graces or duties themselves were sinful graces and duties, but only the imperfections of those graces and duties are all sinful imperfections, which must be through Christ forgiven to us, before any duty can be accepted from us. And therefore, not only the worst of sinners, but even the best of saints must still acknowledge, that whilst on earth he hath sin as well as grace, and must never expect till he comes to heaven to have grace without sin. No, there is none but Christ that ever on earth was so holy as not to be sinful: all others are sinful as well as holy, if not sinful only and not holy. And if we consult the Fathers, this was their settled judg¬ ment too, that all mortals are sinners, except Christ. Justin Martyr calls him, 1 “ That only unreprovable just man.” And Clemens Alexandrinus saith, k u But he (Christ) was alto¬ gether free from human passions. And therefore is he alone judge, because he is alone without sin. But we, by what strength we have, strive to avoid the least sins. 11 And again, 1 “The Word alone is without sin, for to sin is natural and common to all. 11 Whence Gregory Nazianzen: m “ Not to sin at all, God hath ordained it (as a privilege) above the human nature. 11 And St. Ambrose, 11 “ In that thou con- fessest thou offendedst, in this thou hast common fellowship with all, for none is without sin; to deny this is sacrilege. 11 ° u For who can glory, 11 saith St. Hilary, “ that he hath a agnitio, et in humilitate confessio. Tunc enim est secundum hanc in- firmitatem pro suo modulo perfecta ista parva justitia, quando etiam quid sibi desit intelligit. Aug. con¬ tra duas epist. Pelag. 1 . 3. [19. vol. X.] V. et Salon, in Proverb. 1 Mera yap to (TTavpaxrat vpds eKelpop top popop dpcopop Kai SiKaiov avdpcoTTov. Just. Dialog, cum Tryph. [W], k AAA o pep anoXvTos as to nav- reXes dpOpcoirlpLop iraOwv‘ bia tovto yap Ka'i popos KpiTrjs, otl avapapTr]- tos popos' rjpels ocn] dvvapis, d>s otl eAd^tcrra apapraveiv ncipupeOa. Clem. Alex. Paedagog. 1 . 1. c. 2. 1 Movos yap dvapdpTrjTOS 6 A oyos' to pep yap e^apapTaveip nacnv ep- (f)VTOV Kal KOLVOV. Ibid. 1 . 3. C. ult. [p- 3 ° 7 -] m To TravTeXws dvapdpTrjTov virep tj )p dvdpco7TLvr]p (fivcrip era^ep 6 Qeos. Nazian. homil. in Jul. 4. [p. 128. vol. I.] n Quod lapsum fateris, in eo tibi cum omnibus commune consortium: quia nemo sine peccato. Negare hoc sacrilegium. Ambros. in Ps. 118. [p. 1254. vol. I.] 0 Quis enim gloriabitur castum se habere cor coram Deo, nec si XV. Of Christ atone without Sin. 333 chaste heart before God ? nay, though he be an infant of one day old, seeing, according to the apostle, both the origin and law of sin remaineth in us.” Gregory Nyssen also tells us: P “ Wherefore to have no¬ thing of what our adversary possesseth is the privilege of the Lord alone, who was partaker with us of his passions, yet without sin.” And Theodorus Abucara : 8 “ But there is none but Christ alone who was ever perfectly and altogether free from tasting of sin. But every sin, be it what it will, brings forth death.” Cyril of Alexandria to the same purpose : r “ Christ was the first and tho only man upon earth that did not commit sin, neither was guile found in his mouth.” And Cassianus very sharply : s “ This thing therefore, viz. to be without sin, which is singular and proper to Christ alone, he will with the fault of blasphemous pride challenge to himself an equality in, who¬ soever dare profess himself to be without sin ; for then it will follow that he must say, that he hath the likeness of sinful flesh only, and not the truth of sin.” St. Augustine hath also delivered his opinion in this case very plainly, t 44 Perhaps,” saith he, “ it is not without cause, that when we often find in scripture that men are said to be without complaint, we can find none said to be without sin, but that one alone of whom it is openly said, him who did not know sin .” And elsewhere he propounds this question, unius diei fuerit infans, manente in nobis etiam secundum apostolum et origine et lege peccati? Hilar, in Ps. lviii. [4. p. 129.] P A to to prjhev ecr^r]KevaL rwv tov dvTiKei/jLevov KTqpaTcov, pdvov tov Kv~ piov ecrri, tov peTacr^ovTOs qpiv tcov avTOv TvaOrpidTcov ^copisr dpapTias. Greg. Nyssen. in Ecclesiast. [p.444. vol. I.] *1 J 'AKpcos 8e Kal TTCipcmav cipcipTLcis dyevo-TOs ovdels el prj 6 XpurTOg’ ndcra 8e cipapTia Kal rj rt^oCo'a ddvaTOV enKpepeTai. Theod. Abucara de 5 inimicis. [init.] r IlpdoTOs x 6 e\eyxnlvoLs deXcov KaTaXafielv ocjidaXpols, ov povov ov KaTaXrjyf/eTaL ovde dvOe^eTac tov npoKeipevov, dXXci Kai cmoTveaeLTaL k at pvpiav vnoaTT)- creTcu fiXd.(3rjv‘ ttoXXco pdXXov 6 (Hov- Xopevos 7 rpos exelvo to (j)d>s are ids Idelv 8ui twv olxeicov Xoyicrpwv, nei- crcrat tovto, xa'i vfipl^ec els Tqv tov Qeov 8copedv. Chrysost. in 2 Tim. bom. 2. init. [vol. IV.] 344 Of Predestination and Election. Art. this mystery of mysteries. For it concerns God’s predestina¬ tion, which must needs be infinitely above man’s apprehen¬ sion. So that a cockle-fish may as soon crowd the ocean into its narrow shell, as vain man ever comprehend the de¬ crees of God. And hence it is that both in public and private I have still endeavoured to shun discourses of this nature: and now that I am unavoidably fallen upon it, I shall speak as little as possibly I can unto it, especially considering how many other truths are still behind to be insisted upon. And in that little that I shall speak, I shall labour to make use of as few of my own words as by any means I can, speaking nothing concerning this great mystery but what scripture and Fathers have expressly delivered unto me. So much therefore of this article as I have transcribed contains an excellent description of election, or predestination to life, exactly consonant to the doctrine delivered by St. Paul to the Ephesians, in these words: According as lie hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world , that we may be holy and without blame before him in lore: haring 'predes¬ tinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself according to the good pleasure of his will , to the praise of the glory of his grace , wherein he hath made us accepted in the belored. Eph. i. 4, 5, 6. And to Timothy in these words : Who hath sared us and called us with a holy calling; not according to our works' 3 , but according to his own purpose and grace , which was giren us in Jesus Christ before the world began. 2 Tim. i. 9. And what the apostle did here deliver from God the pri¬ mitive church learned and taught from him. St. Augustine expressly : c “ Before he made us he foreknew us, and he chose us in his foreknowledge when he had not as yet made us. By whom could this be done but by him, who calls those b Ov nara tci epya qpdav, ( f>V (r ' lv > nondum fecisset elegit. Sed a quo dXXa tear I8lav npoOeo-iv’ rovrecrTiv hoc fieri potuit, nisi ab eo qui vocat ovdevos avayKci^ovTos, ovbevos crvp- omnia quce non sunt tanquam ea qua fiov\evovTos, dXX’ l 8 Las npoOeaeois’ sunt ? Apostolus enim dicit, Qui o’Uodev £k rrjs dyadoTtjTos avrov, op- elegit nos ante mundi constitutionem. p&pevos eo-cocre, tovto yap eari to Intra mundum facti sumus, et ante kut Idlav npoOeaiv. Ibid. [p. 335.] mundum electi sumus. Aug. de c Antequam faceret nos praescivit praedestinatione et gratia, c. 5. nos, et in ipsa nos praescientia cum XVII, Of Predestination and Election. 345 things that are not as if they were? For the apostle saith, Who chose us before the foundation of the world. We are made within the world, but we were chosen before the world. 11 And again: Out of those to whom the righteous severity had adjudged punishments, according to the inexpressible mercy of his hidden dispensation, he chose out vessels which he might fit for honour. 11 And elsewhere: e “ Firmly believe, and by no means doubt, that the Trinity, the unchangeable God, the certain foreknower of all things and works, both his own and men’s, before all worlds did know to whom he would give grace by faith. Without which none from the beginning of the world to the end of it can be absolved from the guilt of his sin original and actual; for these whom God foreknew , he did also 'predestinate to be conformable to the image of his Son.” And thus Prosper also : fa The predestination of God no catholic person denieth, &c. But the faith of predestination is confirmed from the manifest authorities of the holy scrip¬ tures, to which it is not lawful by any means to ascribe those things that are wickedly done by men, who came into that proneness to fall, not from the creation of God, but from the sin or prevarication of the first parent: from the punishment whereof none is freed but by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, prepared and predestinated in the eternal council of God before the foundation of the world. 11 Fulgentius also hath delivered his opinion very clearly d De his quibus poenam severitas justa decreverat, secundum ineffa- bilem dispositionis occultae miseri- cordiam, elegit vasa quae faceret in honorem. Ibid. c. 13. e Firmissime tene et nullatenus dubites, Trinitatem, Deum incom- mutabilem, rerum omnium atque operum tarn suorum quam humano- rum certissimum cognitorem, ante omnia saecula scire, quibus esset per fidem gratiam largiturus : sine qua nemo potest ex initio mundi usque in finem a reatu peccati tarn origi- nalis quam actualis absolvi. Quos enim Deus prcescivit, et prcedestina- vit conformes fieri imaginis Filii sui. Id. de fide ad Petrum diac. [77. App. vol. VI.] f Praedestinationem Dei nullus catholicus negat. See. Praedestina- tionis autem fides multa sanctarum autoritate scripturarum munita est, cui nullo modo fas est ea quae ab hominibus male aguntur ascribi: qui in proclivitatem cadendi, non ex conditione Dei, sed ex primi patris praevaricatione venerunt. De cujus poena nemo liberatur, nisi per gra¬ tiam Domini nostri Jesu Christi praeparatam, et praedestinatam in aeterno consilio Dei ante constitu- tionem mundi. Prosper, ad capit. Gallor. c. 1. [p. 316.] 346 Of Predestination and Election. Art. in this case: s u For God, 1 ' saith he, “ who made man, did himself prepare in his predestination, both the gift of illu¬ mination to believe, and the gift of perseverance to profit and persevere, and the gift of glorification to reign, for such to whom he pleased to give it: who also doth not any otherways perform in deed than was ordained by his unchangeable will. The truth of which predestination, whereby the apostle witnesseth we were predestinated in Christ before the founda¬ tion of the world, if any one refuse to receive with the belief of the heart, or to utter with the confession of the mouth, if, before the last day of this present life, he lay not aside the obstinacy of his impiety, whereby as a rebel he with- standeth the true and living God, it is manifest that he doth not belong to the number of those which God did before the foundation of the world freely choose in Christ, and pre¬ destinated unto the kingdom.’’'’ And so I pass to what follows in the article. Wherefore , they who be endowed with so excellent a benefit of God be called according to God's purpose by his Spirit working in due season : they through grace obey the calling : they be justified freely: they be made the sons of God by adoption : they be made like the image of his only-begotten Son Jesus Christ: they walk religiously in good works 9 and at length , by God's mercy , they attain to everlasting felicity. After predestination itself described, here we have a descrip¬ tion of such as are predestinated, leading them from grace to B Deus enim qui hominem condi- dit, ipse praedestinatione sua et do¬ num illuminationis ad credendum, et donum perseverantiae ad profici- endum atque permanendum, et do¬ num glorificationis ad regnandum, quibus dare voluit praeparavit : qui- que non aliter perficit in opere, quam in sua sempiterna atque incommu- tabili habet voluntate dispositum. Cujus praedestinationis veritatem, qua nos ante mundi constitutionem praedestinatos in charitate testatur apostolus, si quis detrectet cordis credulitate recipere, vel oris confes- sione proferre, si, ante ultimum diem vitae praesentis, impietatis suae contumaciam, qua Deo vivo et vero rebellis obsistit, non abjecerit, mani- festum est eum non pertinere ad eorum numerum, quos Deus in Christo ante mundi constitutionem gratis elegit, et praedestinavit ad regnum. Fulgent, de incarnatione et gratia Christi, [67.] XVII. Of Predestination and Election. 347 grace, and at length conducting them into glory. All which is virtually if not expressly contained in that excellent pas¬ sage of the apostle to this purpose, from whence I suppose this part of the article was taken, where he saith, For whom he did foreknow , he also did predestinate to he conformed to the image of his Son , that he might be the firstborn among many bre¬ thren. Moreover whom he did predestinate , them he also called: and whom he called , them he also justified: and whom he justi¬ fied, them he also glorified. Rom. viii. 29, 30. Which words St. Augustine having repeated, concludes : h “ Of these who are predestinated none shall perish with the Devil, none of them shall remain under the power of the Devil unto death.*’*’ And the same Father again, or, as others think, Fulgentius, to the same purpose: *' “ Firmly believe, and do not doubt, but that all that God of his bountiful goodness made vessels of mercy were predestinated of God before the foundation of the world unto the adoption of the children of God; and that neither any of them whom God predestinated to the kingdom of hea¬ ven can perish, nor any of those whom he did not predestinate unto life can be saved, for that predestination is the prepara¬ tion of the free gift, whereby the apostle saith we are predes¬ tinated unto the adoption of the children of God by Jesus Christ to himself.*’*’ And so doth Bradwarden the profound say : k u Predestination is the eternal preparation by the will of God, of final grace in the way, and eternal happiness in the country, for a reasonable creature/ 1 But to proceed : As the godly consideration of predestination , and our election in Christ , is full of sweet comfort to godly persons , and such as feel h Horum praedestinatorum nemo cum diabolo peribit, nemo usque ad mortem sub diaboli potestate rema- nebit. Aug. deTrinitate, 1 . 13. [20. vol. VIII.] * Firmissime tene, et nullatenus dubites, omnes quos vasa miseri- cordiae gratuita bonitate Deus facit, ante constitutionem mundi in adop- tionem filiorum Dei praedestinatos a Deo; neque perire posse aliquem eorum, quos Deus praedestinavit ad regnum caelorum, nec quemquam in themselves the working of eorum quos non praedestinavit ad vitam ulla posse ratione salvari. Praedestinatio enim ilia gratuitae do¬ nations est praeparatio, qua nos apostolus ait praedestinatos in adop- tionem filiorum Dei per Jesum Christum in ipsum. Id. de fide ad Petr. diac. [78. App. vol. VI.] k Praedestinatio est aeterna prae¬ paratio ex voluntate divina, gratiae finalis in via, et beatitudinis sempi- ternae in patria creaturae rationali. Bradward. de caus. Dei, 1 . 1. c.45. 348 Of Predestination and Election. Art. the Spirit of Christ, mortifying the works of the flesh, and their earthly members, and drawing up their mind to high and heavenly things, as well because it doth greatly establish and confirm their faith of eter¬ nal salvation to be enjoyed through Christ, as because it doth fervently kindle their love towards God: so, for curious and carnal persons, lacking the Spirit of Christ, to have continually before their eyes the sentence of God's predestination, is a most dangerous downfall, whereby the Devil doth thrust them either into despera¬ tion, or into wretchfulness of most unclean living, no less dangerous than desperation. Furthermore, we must receive God's promises in such wise, as they be generally set forth to us in holy scripture: and, in our doings, that will of God is to be followed, which we have expressly declared unto us in the word of God. In which words there are several things briefly to be con¬ sidered. First, that to holy and religious persons, the godly consideration of this doctrine of our election in Christ is full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort; which we see verified in the example of St. Paul, who, having considered the truth of this mystery, immediately triumphs with joy and comfort, crying out, What shall we say then to these things ? If God be with us, who can be against us? Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect ? It is God that justifleth. Rom. viii. 31, 33. *Not, who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's people, or of God's servants, but who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect ? If God hath elected us, it is in vain for men or devils to accuse : if He be our friend, it is in vain for any one to be our foe. But, secondly, though the godly consideration of this doc¬ trine is the ground of great consolation to the godly, yet for curious and carnal persons to have it continually before their 1 Kai ovk fine ris eyKaXeaei Kara twv dovXan/ rod 6eod, ovde Kara to>v mareov rod deod, dWd Kara ron> en- XeKrdou rod dead' rj yap eickoyr) dperr/s atipeiov ecrTLv. Chrysost. in Rom. hom. 15. [vol. III. p. 128. 39.] XVII. Of Predestination and Election. 649 eyes is a most dangerous downfall, whereby the Devil doth thrust them either, first, into desperation ; (and so indeed had St. Augustine no sooner explained and confirmed this great doctrine, but Hilarius Arelatensis sends him word, that some m were so moved with it, that they said, desperation was held forth to men by it;) or, secondly, into wretchfulness of most unclean living, no less perilous than desperation; a sad ex¬ ample of which St. Augustine relates : for, saith he, n “ there was a certain man in our monastery, who being reproved by his brethren why he would do some things which he should not do, and not do some things which he should do, he an¬ swered, Whatsoever I am now, I shall be such a one as God foreknew I would be. Who truly (saith the Father) both said true, and yet this truth did not turn to good, but it so turned to evil, that leaving the society of the monastery he became a dog that returned to his vomit; and yet what he may be hereafter, it is uncertain.’’’’ And lastly, it is here very opportunely added, that we must receive God's promises as they be generally set forth in the holy scripture. Though they are but some that God hath elected, yet his promises are made to all: Come unto me , all ye that are weary and heavy laden , and I will give you rest , Matt. xi. 28 : and, Whosoever believeth in him shall not perish , but have everlasting life , John iii. 16. In the application of which and the like promises, we must not have respect to the eternity of God's purpose, but to the universality of his pro¬ mise. His promises are made to all, and therefore are all bound to lay hold upon his promises: and as we are to re¬ ceive his promises, so are we also to obey his precepts as made to all. So that in all our doings the will of God is to be followed as we have it expressly declared to us in his word: m His verbis sanctitatis tuae ita moventur, ut dicant quandam de- sperationem hominibus exhiberi. Hilar. Arel. Epist. ad August. [Aug. vol. II. ep. ccxxvi. 6.] n Fuit quidam in nostro monas- terio, qui corripientibus fratribus cur quaedam non facienda faceret, et quaedam facienda non faceret, re- spondebat, Qualiscunque nunc sum. talis ero qualem me Deus futurum esse praescivit. Qui profecto et ve- rum dicebat; et hoc verum non pro- ficiebat in bonum, sed usque adeo profecit in malum, ut deserta mo- nasterii societate, fieret canis rever- sus ad suum vomitum, et tamen ad- huc qualis sit futurus incertum est. Aug. de dono perseverantiae. [38. vol. X.] 350 Of Predestination and Election. Art. not considering whether God elected me from eternity, but whether I obey him in time; if I obey him in time, I may certainly conclude that he elected me from eternity. And thus do I find St. Augustine advising this doctrine to be so published, as that men may not thereby be brought off, but rather spurred on to obedience. °“ It is of too much conten¬ tion therefore," n saith he, “either to deny predestination, or to doubt of predestination : which notwithstanding is not to be so preached to the people, that it may seem amongst the un¬ skilful and dull-sighted multitude to be reprehended in its being preached. As the foreknowledge of God seems to be reprehended, which certainly they cannot deny, if it be said to men, whether you run or sleep, what he that cannot be deceived foreknew you would be, that you will be. But it is the part of a deceitful or unskilful physician to apply a profit¬ able medicine so as that it either do no good, or else harm. But we must say, so run that ye may obtain, and in your very running you shall know that ye were so foreknown that ye would run lawfully; and so if there be any other way that the foreknowledge of God can be preached, whereby the idle¬ ness of man may be repelled."’’’ And in the next chapter, P“ And that way which we told him that speaks to the ° Nimiae igitur contention^ est praedestinationi contradicere, vel de prsedestinatione dubitare; quae ta- men non ita populis praedicanda est, ut apud imperitam vel tardioris in- telligentiae multitudinem redargui quodammodo ipsa sua praedicatione videatur. Sicut redargui videtur et praescientia Dei, quam certe negare non possunt, si dicatur hominibus, sive curratis sive dormiatis, quod vos praescivit, qui falli non potest, hoc eritis. Dolosi autem vel impe- riti medici est utile medicaraentum sic alligare, ut aut non prosit aut obsit. Sed dicendum est. Sic cur- rite ut comprehendatis, atque in ipso cursu vestro ita vos esse prae- cognitos noveritis ut legitime cur¬ ratis ; et si quo alio modo Dei prae- scientia praedicari potest, ut hominis segnitia repellatur. Aug. de dono perseverantiae, [56, 57. vol. X.] r Ilium etiam modum quo uten- dum esse in praedestinationis praedi¬ catione nos diximus loquenti ad po- pulum, non existimo debere sufficere, nisi hoc velliujusmodi aliquid addat, ut dicat: vos itaque ipsam obediendi perseverantiam a patre luminum, a quo descendit omne datum optimum et omne donum perfectum, sperare debetis, et quotidianis orationibus poscere; atque hoc faciendo confi- dere non vos esse a praedestinatione populi ejus alienos, quia etiam hoc, ut faciatis, ipse largitur. Absit au¬ tem a vobis ideo desperare de vobis, quoniam spem vestram in ipso ha¬ bere jubemini, non in vobis : male- dictus enim omnis homo, qui spem habet in homine; et bonum est confidere in Domino, quam confi- dere in homine, quia beati omnes qui confidunt in eum. Et hanc spem tenentes, servite Domino in timore, et exultate ei cum tremore. Ibid. [62.] XVII. Of Predestination and Election. 351 people he ought to use in the preaching of predestination, 1 do not think it sufficient, unless he add this or something like to it, so as to say, You therefore ought to hope for this perseverance in obedience from the Father of lights, from whom cometh every good and perfect gift, and desire it in your daily prayers: and in doing this, to trust that you are not strangers from the predestination of his people, because it is He that enabled you to do this. But be it far from you therefore to despair of yourselves, because you are commanded to put your trust in Him, and not in yourselves. For cursed be every man that putteth his trust in man ; and it is good to trust in the Lord, rather than to trust in man; because, blessed are they that put their trust in him. And having this hope, do you serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice with trembling.’’'' And thus doth this reverend Father annex the same caution to this doctrine of predestination, that after him our reverend convocation did; even that, for all the truth of that doctrine, we are still to hope in God's promises and obey his precepts ; or as it is here expressed, IF e must receive God's promises as they be generally set forth in holy scripture: and in our doings that will of Gocl is to be followed, which we have expressly declared unto us in the word of God. ARTICLE XVIII. OF OBTAINING ETERNAL SALVATION ONLY BY THE NAME OF CHRIST. They also are to be had accursed that presume to sap, that every man shall be saved by the law or sect which he professeth , so that he be diligent to frame his life according to that law , and the light of nature . For the holy scripture doth set out unto us only the name of Jesus Christ , whereby men must be saved. A S there is no nation where there is not some religion or other professed in it, so neither is there any religion but what hath some professors or other that are serious in the profession of it. So that there may be some strict pro¬ fessors in the worst, as well as some loose professors in the best of all religions whatsoever. And though the loose pro¬ fessors of no religion can look for salvation by it, yet the strict professors of all religions expect happiness from that religion they do profess. The Indians hope to be saved as well as the Mahumetans; the Mahumetans hope to be saved as well as the Jews; and the Jews they hope to be saved as well as the Christians; and the Christians they hope to be saved as well as any of them. And yet all these religions being so contrary one to another, it is impossible they should all have happiness entailed upon them. And now the great question is, Which of all these religions a man had best pick out from amongst the rest, to settle himself upon, and to become a professor of; or which religion will be surest to bring salvation to us, if we be serious in our profession of it? Which question I have endeavoured elsewhere to determine; and here we have it decided by a whole council, even that it is the Christian Art. XVIII. Of obtaining Eternal Salvation , fyc. 353 religion that is not only the best, but the only way to true hap¬ piness and everlasting salvation; and that they are to be accursed that 'presume to say that every man shall be saved by the law or sect which he professeth , so that he be diligent to frame his life according to that law , and the light of nature. So that let a man be never so strict a Jew, never so strict a Maho¬ metan, never so strict in any other religion whatsoever, unless he be a Christian he can never be saved. So that though many Christians may go to hell, yet none but Christians can ever go to heaven ; many that profess Christ may not be saved, yet all that deny Christ are certain to be damned : for it is by Christ, and Christ only, that we can be saved. And this appears very plainly from the word of God ; for there doth Christ himself say, a I am the way, the truth , and the life: b none cometli to the Father , but by me. John xiv. 6. And if none can come to the Father but by Christ, it is by Christ only that we come to happiness: for it is he alone in whom we may be happy, without whom we cannot but be miserable. And as we cannot be happy unless we come to God, so neither can we come to God but only by faith in Christ. And therefore is it said, He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already , John iii. 18. c So that it is as certain that all that do not believe in him shall be condemned, as that all that do believe in him shall be pardoned: it is as certain we shall be damned without him, as it is certain we may be saved by him. And therefore also it is said expressly, Neither is there salvation in a Ipsum audiamus, Ego sum via et veritas et vita. Si veritatem quse- ris viam tene, nam ipse est via quae est veritas. Ipsa est quo is, ipsa est qua is. Non per aliud is ad illud, non per aliud venis ad Christum. Per Christum ad Christum venis. Quomodo per Christum ad Chri¬ stum ? Per Christum hominem ad Christum Deum. Aug. in Joh. tract. 13. [4. vol. III. par. ii.] Quid au- tem opus erat ut diceret. Ego sum via, veritas et vita, cum via cognita qua iret, restaret nosse quo iret, nisi quia ibat ad veritatem, ibat ad vi- tam ? Ibat ergo per seipsum ad seipsum. Et nos quo iinus nisi ad ipsum ? Et qua imus nisi per ipsum ? Ibid, tract. 69. [2.] b ’A yadij yap ovTtos odos aTvape^o- devTos Ka\ dnXapgs 6 uvpios gpcop 'igaovs 7 rpos top opreos dyadop tov tt arepa (fiepcop' ov8e\s yap ep^erai, (prjal, 7rpos top 7 rarepa, el pg 81 e’pov' Toiavrr) pep ovp g rjperepa npos debp apodos 81a tov viov. Basil, de Spiritu S. c. 8. [vol. II.] c Et to maTeveip 'Kpurrop vlop elpai deov Ccogp olioplop e\ei, to dm- crTeip it; dpayKr/s ddpaTop. Id. advers. Eunomium, 1 . 4. [vol. I.] BEVERIDGE. a a 354 Of obtaining Eternal Salvation Art. any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men , whereby we must be saved , Acts iv. 12. That is, there is no other d thing in the whole world whereby our sins may be pardoned, our persons justified, and our souls saved, but only Jesus Christ the Son of God. It is only by him that we can be saved, as it was only for us that he was condemned: nay, he was therefore condemned only for us, that we might be saved only in him. And to scripture we might add reason too, but that I have already demonstrated it from reason, not only elsewhere, but even in these Articles themselves, having before proved that all men were born in sin: art. IX. that all men have sin living in them; art. XV. that man cannot free himself from sin; art. X. nor deserve to be freed by any other; yea, and that it is by Christ only that he can be freed; art. XII. that it is Christ only, who by the value of his death can take away the guilt of those sins that lie upon him, and it is Christ only, who, by the virtue of his blood, can wash away the filth of those sins that reign over him; and if so, it must needs fol¬ low, that it is only by Christ that we can be saved. For if without him we be of what religion we will, we shall still lie d And thus we find in scripture the name oft put for the thing itself, as r\v Te ox^ os ovofiaTatv eVi to ciIto, cos eKarov e 'Uoariv , And the company of the names together were an hun¬ dred and twenty, Acts i. 15. That is, as the Syriac renders it, jooi A..J Ifco cpj 1*2.0 i. e. But the company of men there were anhundred and twenty. And so the vulgar Latin, Erat au- tem turba hominum simul fere cen¬ tum viginti. And so is mm n\i? The name of God in scripture fre¬ quently put for God himself; as, npm 'rru n®. The name of the God of Jacob, that is, The God of Jacob defend thee, Ps. xx. 2. Hence R. David upon that place, And they shall know mrr mtu '2 that my name is Jehovah, Jer. xvi. ult. saith, '\' oxd '\ m© mn '3 mrr nx ’3 m3 mn, i. e. As if he should have said, that I am the Lord, for that is his name, and his name is himself. And therefore is nrcn The name put sometime for God himself, as nurn n« rv^-nirn muxn p ipn And the woman of the Israelitish son blasphemed the name, that is, the Lord, or the name of the Lord, as our translation hath it. Lev. xxiv. 11. The reason of which denomi¬ nation Elias saith is, 'D 1 ? n'rm*? rniom in« V3in^, thatis, Because it is forbidden to remem¬ ber any of his names in vain. Elias in Thisb. [p. 247.] Where he saith also, it is never used for God but with nr'mrr xn an emphatical He before it, viz. oran. But we may see the contrary in the same chapter with that before quoted, viz. Lev. xxiv. 16, where it is said, C3© up: a, i. e. when he blasphemeth the name, that is, the Lord, or the name of the Lord, as we render it; and so the LXX, to ovoga Kvpiov. Syr. my name; Jonath. immi note? the proper name, viz. of God, which is Jehovah. XVIII. only by the Name of Christ . 355 in our sins : it is impossible that without him we should attain to happiness, for freedom from sin is the first step to happi¬ ness. So that as it is impossible hell should be heaven so long as God is not enjoyed there, so is it impossible a soul should be happy so long as sin reigns there. It is sin that made hell, and there is something of hell in every sin : and therefore, until sin be perfectly pardoned to us, we can never be perfectly free from misery ; and until sin be subdued under us, we can never be perfectly brought to happiness. Now seeing it is only by Christ our transgressions can be pardoned, and only by Christ our corruptions can be conquered, it must needs be only by Christ our souls can be saved; and if it be only by Christ we can be saved, without him we cannot but be damned. And therefore, let a man be of what religion he please, and as strict in that religion as he can, unless Christ be his, and he be Christ’s, his religion is in vain; he may be strict in his profession of it, but it will never bring any happiness to him. No, it is Christ, and Christ alone, we are to expect salvation from. The Fathers are also very express in this particular. Igna¬ tius plainly : e u Let no man be deceived; unless he believe that Jesus Christ was conversant in the flesh, and acknow¬ ledge his cross and passion, and blood which he shed for the salvation of the world, he cannot attain to everlasting life, whether he be a king, or a priest, or a prince; whether he be a private man, or a lord, or a servant, or a man, or a woman. 11 None saved without Christ. For as Justin Martyr saith, f “In whom is it possible for us sinful and ungodly persons to be justified but only in the Son of God ? Oh sweet change ! Oh unsearchable contrivance ! Oh unexpected benefits ! That the sin of many should be hid in one just Person, and the righteousness of one should justify many sinners !” And hence it is that the Fathers are so peremptory in e M rjbels uXavacrOa’ tav prj m- f ’Ey tlvl BiKaiaOr/vai bvvarov tovs crTfvcrr] Xpiarov 'hjcrovv tv aapKi avopovs rjn^ s Kal do-efiels, rj tv pova nenoXiTevcrOcu, Kai opoXoyrjcrr) tov tS via tov deov; a rrjs yXvKeias dv- (rravpov avrov, nai to nados, kcu to raXXayrjs, a Ttjs dve^xvidaTOv btjpi- alpa o tije^eev xmtp tt)s tov Koapov ovpyias, a tcov d.7rpoa8oKT]Ta>v evep- (TCOTrjptas, ov Tr/s £c or/s alaviov rev^e- ycmav, iva avopia pev ttoWgov ev Tai, Kav (3acri\evs fl, Kav lepevs, Kav diKala iv\ Kpvfirj, diKaioavvr) de evos dp\av , Kav IbicoTrjs, Kav SecnroTrjs, Kav noWovs avopovs diKaiooarj. Just, 8ov\os, Kav dvrjp, rj ywi 7. Ignat. £pist. ad Diognet. [9*] Epist. ad Smyrnenses, [p. 115.J a a 2 856 Of obtaining Eternal Salvation , fyc. Art. XVIII. avouching, that there is no salvation to be had, but only within the pale of the church. 6“Let no man therefore,” saith Origen, “ persuade himself, let no man deceive himself; without this house, that is, without the church, there is none saved."’’’ And St. Cyprian, * n “ Neither can they live without, seeing the house of God is but one, and none can have salva¬ tion but only in the church.’’"’ And so Gaudentius : 1 “ But it is manifest that all the men of that time perished in the flood, but only such as obtained to be found within the ark, which bore the type of the church. For in like manner now they can by no means be saved, that are strangers to the apostolic faith and catholic church.” And St. Augustine, or Fulgentius, to the same purpose: k “ Firmly believe, and doubt not at all, but that not only all pagans, but also all Jews, heretics, and schismatics, that end this present life without the catholic church, shall go into eternal fire, which is prepared for the Devil and his angels.” For as the same Father, St. Augustine, elsewhere saith, h ‘Do not believe you can be saved by any other art than by the in¬ vocation and cross of Christ.” And to name no more, the fourth council at Lateran also expressly saith, m “ But there is one universal church of the faithful, out of which there is none at all saved.” And therefore we may well conclude, it is only by the name of Christ that eternal salvation can be obtained. s Nemo ergo sibi persuadeat, nemo seipsum decipiat; extra hanc domum, id est extra ecclesiam, nemo salvatur. Origen. super Jesum Nave, horn. 3. [5. vol. I.] h Neque enim vivere foris pos- sunt, cum domus Dei una sit, et nemini salus esse nisi in ecclesia possit. Cyprian. Epist. ad Pompo- nium, [iv.J 1 Periisse autem constat in illo diluvio omnes ipsius temporis homi¬ nes, praeter eos qui intra arcam, quae typum gerebat ecclesiae, reperiri meruerint. Nam similiter etiam nunc omnino salvi esse non poterunt, qui ab apostolica fide et ab ecclesia ca- tholica fuerint alieni. Gaudent. episc. Brix. de lect. evang. tract. [8. vol. V. p. 955. Bibl. Max. Patr.] k Firmissime tene, et nullatenus dubites non solum omnes paganos, sed etiam omnes Judaeos, haereticos atque schismaticos, qui extra eccle- siam catholicam praesentem finiunt vitam, in ignem aeternum ituros, qui praeparatus est diabolo et angelis ejus. De fide ad Petrum diaconum, [81. Aug. vol. VI. App.] 1 Per nullam aliam artem salvari vos credatis, nisi per invocationem et crucem Christi. Aug. de rectitu- dine catholicae conversation^, [15. Ibid.] m Una vero est fidelium univer¬ salis ecclesia, extra quam nullus omnino salvatur. Concil. Lateran. 4. de fide catholica, [Cone. vol.VII. P- ARTICLE XIX. OF THE CHURCH. The visible Church of Christ is a coyigregation of faithful men , in the which the pure Word of God is preached , and the sacraments be duly administered, according to God's ordinance , in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same. T HOUGH the church of Christ be one and the same church both in heaven and in earth, yet it there differs much from itself as here. There it is triumphant, not mili¬ tant ; here it is militant, not triumphant: there it consisteth of good only, and not of bad ; here of bad also as well as good. And to name no more, there it is invisible as to us; here it is visible unto all. We cannot see the church as crowned with glory in heaven; but any one may see it as established by grace on earth. And the church as thus visible is the subject of this article; so much of it as I have transcribed containing nothing but a full and excellent description of this visible church; which I the unworthiest of its members, by the assistance of Him who is the Head, shall endeavour to illustrate and confirm, speaking to every particular notion in it as it stands in order. First therefore, the visible church is here said to be a con¬ gregation. And indeed though a our word church doth not a That the word church doth not that even in his time the places con- imply a congregation is plain from secrated to the worship of God were the Greek word it is derived from, called Kvpiaxai : his words be these : viz. KvpuiKr ), the Lord’s house, from V E v6e 8e xal tov deanorov Karr/yopias whence the Scots call it kyrke, and rj^icorai ra xaBiepcopeva ovx avdpdo - we church. Neither is this any new rroav rvxovra rr/s eTriKXrjcrecos' avrov found word to express the Greek 8e rod rcdv o\a>v Kvpiov' napo xal kv- fKKkrjcrla by. For Eusebius saith, piaxcov rj^iwurai rco v encowpiCov- Eu- 358 Of the Church. Art. imply so much, yet the Greek word used by the apostles, which we commonly translate church, doth, b not as to the etymology and notation, but howsoever as to the common use and acceptation of it; it being sometimes used to signify an c assembly or congregation in general, and sometimes for such a congregation as profess faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, and therefore used also, though perhaps not in scripture, yet in other writings, to denote d the place where such congregations or gatherings together of people were made. And that the Greek word which we translate church doth in its most proper sense signify a congregation, and by consequence that the church may well be called a congregation, is plain also from the e most ancient, I mean, the oriental translations, that seb. Orat. de laudibus Constantini. [vol. I. p. 770.] And hence it is that we to this day call it the church. But there seems to be this difference betwixt €kk\t](xlci and KvpiaKrj, viz. oiKia, that €KK\t](TLa in the first place signifies the congregation met toge¬ ther in a place, and then the place where they meet; but KvpiaKrj , the kyrke or church, doth in the first place signify the place where the congregation meets, and then the congregation that meets in that place. b The Greek word is cKKXrjo-la, from (KKaXelv, which signifies pro¬ perly evocare, not convocare. So Methodius, on eKKXrjalav napa to eKKe<\r]K€vai ras rjdovas XiyeaOai s Xeyovcriv ovtoi ol aXrjdcos epr/poi OeLas crvvecrecos di- ddcrKaXoi tt/s ovarjs eKKXrjcrias nacrrjs, piav /cal ttjv avTrjv ulcttiv e’^oi >ar]s eis navra tov Koapov, kuOcos npocefyaper. ibid. [3.] 360 Of the Church. Art. itself a particular church, (whence we read of the church of Corinth, 1 Cor. i. 2, the church of Thyatira, the church of Pergamus, the church of Philadelphia, the church of Ephesus, and so also sometimes in the plural number the churches of Asia, the churches of Galatia, &c., I say, though every one of these be a particular church,) and all of them particular churches, yet in reference to the one Head they are governed by, and the one faith they agree in, they are all but one ’ca¬ tholic or universal church; they are all but the one visible church spoken of in this article church is a congregation, so is 1 I say catholic or universal, be¬ cause I look upon that as the right and proper notion of the word ca¬ tholic, as Theophilus Antiochenus useth it in those words, on Swards icrnv 6 Qeos noir/aai rrjv KadoXiKrjv dvdaracnv cnr dvr a>v civ 6p dm a>r\Theoph. adv. Autol. 1 .1. [18.] And in this sense it is that Isidorus Hispalensis saith the church is called catholic. Sancta ecclesia ideo dicitur catholica pro eo quod universaliter per omnem mundum sit diffusa. Isidor. de summo bono, 1 . i. c. [16.] And so others too; as, Inde dicta est catho¬ lica quia sit rationalis et ubique dif¬ fusa. Optat. 1 . 2. K aOoXiKr) pev Ka- Xeircu dm to Kara ndar/s tivai rrjs oiKovpivrjs dno nepdrcov yrjs icos ne- parcov. Cyril. Catech. 18. [n.] Though the Fathers do often use the word catholic also for what we call orthodox, viz. in opposition to heretics. Dissensio quippe vos et divisio facit haeretieos, pax vero et unitas facit catholicos. Aug. contra liter. Petil. 1 . 2. [219. vol. IX.]; where we see catholicus and hcereticus opposed to one another. And hence it is that I have one Greek copy of Athanasius’s Creed that begins, El r\s OiXei crarOrjvai, npo ndvroov xprj avrcp rrjv KaOoXiKrjv Kparrjcrai nlariv, but another, Et r\s /SodAoiro acodr/vai, npo ndvroov avrcb XP €LCL Kpartjaai rrjv opOddo^ov nicrriv, SO that KaOoXlKI ) and op668o£os both signify the same thing, [vol. II. pp.728,731.] And in this sense I suppose it is, that par¬ ticular churches are also sometimes . And therefore, as the visible it but one congregation. called catholic, as when it is said, f O iKSiKrjrrjs ovv rov cvayyiXiov ovk rjnl- araro era inlcrKonov 8 clv elvai iv KaOoXiKtj iKKXrjala, iv 17 ovk Tjyvoei, nebs ydp ; npecrfivripovs eivai recrcra- panovra e£. Euseb. Hist. 1 . 6. [43. p. 272. vol. II.] And in the letter of the church of Smyrna concerning the martyrdom of their bishop Poly¬ carp, it is said of Polycarp, that he was §t8d(TK(i\oS aiTO \aq> rrjs v, ov crvvaycoyr) 6 (tl(ov. Ignat. Epist. ad Trail, [p.66.] m Ecclesia non enim quae non habet sacerdotes. Hieron. adv. Lu¬ cifer. [21. vol. II.] 364 Of the Church. Art. be no church without them. With this description of the church agrees that of Lactantius: n “ But, 11 saith he, “ be¬ cause every company of heretics think themselves principally to be Christians, and that theirs is the catholic church, we must know that that is the true church, wherein there is confession and repentance, which doth wholesomely cure the sins and wounds which the frailty of the flesh is subject to. 11 And therefore the church must needs be a congregation of faithful men, if confession, viz. of Christ crucified and repent¬ ance, must needs be in the true church; for these are the principal things wherein that faithfulness consisteth. And again, saith he, 0 “ For when they are called Phrygians, or Novatians, or Valentinians, or Marcionites, or Anthropians, or the like, they cease to be Christians, who, leaving the name of Christ, take up human and external words. That is therefore the only catholic church which retains true worship. 11 Now it is impossible any church should retain true worship without the word and sacraments, these being the principal parts of true worship; and therefore it is necessary that we should confess, that the visible church is a congregation of faithful men , wherein the word is tndy preached, and the sacraments be duly administered. As the church of Jerusalem , Alexandria , and Antioch , have erred; so also hath the church of Rome erred , not only in their living and manner of ceremonies , but also in matters of faith. After the catholic or universal church described, here we have a particular church to be considered. Indeed, here are several particular churches contained under the forenamed catholic church, mentioned, viz. the church of Jerusalem, the n Sed tamen quia singuli quique ccetus haereticorum se potissimum Christianos, et suam esse catholicam ecclesiam putant, sciendum est illam esse veram, in qua est confessio et poenitentia, quae peccata et vulnera, quibus subjecta est imbecillitas car- nis, salubriter curat. Lactant. de vera sap. [lib. IV.] fin. ° Cum enim Phryges, aut Nova- tiani, aut Valentiniani, aut Mar- cionitae, aut Anthropiani, seu quili- bet alii nominantur, Christiani esse desierunt,quiChristi nomine amisso, bumana et externa vocabula indue- runt. Sola igitur catholica ecclesia est, quae verum cultum retinet. Ibid. XIX. Of the Church. 365 church of Alexandria, the church of Antioch, and the church of Rome : but it is the church of Rome which seems to be principally aimed at in this place ; that being the chief if not the only particular church that ever pretended to infallibility. That the catholic or universal church is infallible, so as con¬ stantly and firmly to maintain and hold every particular neces¬ sary truth delivered in the gospel in one place or other, cannot be denied ; but that any particular church, or the church of Rome in particular, is infallible, we have it expressly denied and opposed in this article, it being here expressly asserted, that the church of Rome hath erred , and that not only in their living and manner of ceremonies , but even in matters of faith. Now to prove that the church of Rome hath erred, even in matters of faith, I think the best way is to compare the doctrine maintained by them with the doctrine delivered in these Articles. For whatsoever is contained in these Articles, we have, or shall by the assistance of God prove to be conso¬ nant to scripture, reason, and Fathers ; and by consequence to be a real truth. And therefore whatsoever is any way contrary to what is here delivered must needs be an error. And so that besides other errors which the church of Rome holds, be sure, whereinsoever it differs from the doctrine of the church of England, therein it errs. Now to prove that the church of Rome doth hold such doctrines as are contrary to the doctrine of the church of England, I shall not insist upon any particular though never so eminent persons amongst them, that have delivered many doctrines contrary to ours: for I know, as it is amongst ourselves, that is not an error of our church that is the error of some one or many particular persons in it; so also among them, every thing that Bellarmine, Johan¬ nes de Turrecremata, Gregorius de Yalentia, Alphonsus de Cas¬ tro, or any of the grandees of their church saith, cannot be accounted as an error of their church, if it be false, nor if it be true, as the truth of the whole church. A church may be ca¬ tholic though it hath many heretics in it; and a church may be heretical though it hath many catholics in it. And therefore, I say, to prove the doctrine of their church to be erroneous, I shall not take any notice of the errors of particular persons, but of the errors deliberately and unanimously concluded upon, and 366 Of the Church. Art. subscribed to, and published as the doctrine of that church by the whole church itself met together in council: for the doctrine delivered by a council cannot be denied to be the doctrine of the whole church there represented. As the doc¬ trine delivered in these Articles, because it was concluded upon in a council of English divines, is accounted the doctrine of the church of England; and so the doctrine concluded upon in a council of Romish divines cannot be denied to be the doctrine of the church of Rome. And of all the councils they have held, that which I shall pitch upon in this case is the council of Trent, both because it was the most general council they ever held, and also because it was held about the same time at Trent that our convocation that composed these Articles was held at London. For it was in the year of our Lord 1562 that our convocation that concluded upon these Articles was held at London ; and though the council of Trent was begun in the year of our Lord 1545, yet it was not concluded and confirmed till the fifth year of pope Pius the Fourth, ann. Dom. [1564,] as appears Pfrom the said pope Pius's bull for the confirmation of it. So that our convocation was held within the same time that that council was. And so our church concluded upon truths here, whilst theirs agreed upon errors there. Neither need we go any further to prove that they agreed upon errors, than by shewing that many things that they did then subscribe to were contrary to what our church about the same time concluded upon. For all our Articles are, as we may see, agreeable to scrip¬ ture, reason, and Fathers: and they delivering many things quite contrary to the said Articles, so many of them must needs be contrary both to scripture, reason, and Fathers too, and therefore cannot but be errors. And so in shewing that the doctrine of the church of Rome is in many things contrary to the church of England, I shall prove from scripture, reason, and Fathers the truth of this proposition, that the church of Rome hath erred even in matters of faith. Q For this bull ends thus; Datum Romae apud sanctum Petrum, anno incarnationis Dominicse millesimo quingentesimo sexagesimo [quarto]. septimo kalend. Februarii, pontifi- catus nostri anno quinto. Bull. sup. confirmat. concil. Trident. [Cone, vol. X. p. 197.] XIX. Of the Church. 3(17 Now, though there be many things wherein the church of Rome did at that, and so still doth at this time, disagree with ours, yet I shall pick out but some of those propositions that do in plain terms contradict these Articles. As first, we say, art. VI, scripture is sufficient, &c. and the other books, (viz. commonly called the Apocrypha,) the church doth not apply them to establish any doctrine. But the church of Rome thrusts them into the body of canonical scriptures, and accounts them as canonical as any of the rest; saying, r “ But this synod thought good to write down to this decree an index of the holy books, lest any one should doubt which they are that are received by this council. But they are the underwritten. Of the Old Testament, the five books of Moses, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of the Kings, two of the Chronicles, Esdras I. and II., which is called Nehemias, Tobias, Judith, Hester, Job, Psalter of one hundred and fifty Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, the Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Isaiah, Jeremiah with Baruch, Eze¬ kiel, Daniel, twelve lesser Prophets, that is, Osee, &c., two books of the Maccabees, the I. and II. Of the New Testa¬ ment, the four Gospels, &c. as ours. But if any one doth not receive all these books, with every part of them, as they use to be read in the catholic (viz. the Roman) church, and as they are contained in the ancient vulgar Latin edition, for holy and canonical, and shall knowingly contemn the foresaid traditions, let him be anathema Secondly, we say that original sin is the fault and corrup- r Sacrorum vero librorum indicem huic decreto ascribendum censuit (synodus), ne cui dubitatio suboriri possit, quinam sunt qui ab ipsa synodo suscipiuntur. Sunt vero in- frascripti: Testamenti veteris quin- que Moysi, id est. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numeri, Deuteronomium, Joshue, Judicum, Ruth, quatuor Regum, duo Paralipomenon, Esdrae primus et secundus, qui dicitur Nehemias, Tobias, Judith, Hester, Job, Psalterium Davidicum 150 Psalmorum, Parabolae, Ecclesiastes, Canticum Canticorum, Sapientia, Ecclesiasticus, Isaias, Hierernias cum Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel, duodecim Prophetae minores, id est, Osee, &c., duo Macchabaeorum primus et se¬ cundus. Testamenti Novi quatuor Evangelia, &c. Si quis autem libros ipsos integros, cum omnibus suis partibus, prout in ecclesia catholica legi consueverunt, et in veteri vul- gata Latina editione habentur, pro sacris et canonicis non susceperit, et traditiones praedictas sciens et prudens contempserit, anathema sit. Concil. Trident. Ses. 4. [Ibid. p. 22.] 368 Of the Church. Aut. tion of every man, none excepted, art. IX ; but they say, s “ But this synod declares it is not their intention to com¬ prehend the blessed and unspotted Virgin Mary the mother of God in this decree, where it treats of original sin. v> Thirdly, we say we are accounted righteous before God only for the merit of our Lord Jesus Christ by faith, and so justified by faith only, art. XI; but they say, 1 “ If any one say that a sinner is justified by faith only, that he so under¬ stand that nothing else is required to attain the grace of justification, and that it is noways necessary that he should be prepared and disposed by the motion of his own will, let him be anathema? Fourthly, we say that works before justification have the nature of sin, art. XIII; but they say, u “ If any one say, that all the works that are done before justification, howsoever they are done, are truly sins, or deserve the hatred of God, let him be anathema? Fifthly, we say Christ was alone without sin, art. XV; they, that the Virgin Mary also was : x “ If any one say, that a man being once justified can sin no more, nor lose his grace, and therefore he who falls and sins was never truly justified ; or on the contrary, that he can avoid through his whole life all even venial sins, unless by a special privilege from God, as the church holdeth concerning the blessed Virgin, let him be anathema? Sixthly, we say the Itomish doctrine concerning purgatory, pardons, worshipping and adoration as well of images as relics, and also invocation of saints, is a fond thing, vainly s Declarat tamen hsec ipsa syno- dus non esse suae intentionis com- prehendere in hoc decreto, ubi de peccato originali agitur, beatam et immaculatam Virginem Mariam Dei genitricem. Ibid. Ses. 5. [p. 29.] t Si quis dixerit sola fide impium justificari, ut ita intelligat nihil aliud requiriquod ad justificationis gratiam consequendam cooperetur, et nulla ex parte necesse esse eum suae vo¬ luntatis motu praeparari atque dis- poni, anathema sit. Ses. 6. Can. 9. u Si quis dixerit opera omnia quae ante justificationem fiunt, quacunque ratione facta sint, vere esse peccata, vel odium Dei mereri, &c. anathema sit. Ibid. Can. 7. x Si quis hominem semel justifi- catum dixerit amplius peccare non posse, neque gratiam amittere, atque adeo eum qui labitur et peccat nun- quam vere fuisse justificatum; aut contra, posse in tota vita peccata omnia etiam venialia vitare, nisi ex speciali privilegio quemadmodum de beata Virgine tenet ecclesia, anathe¬ ma sit. Ibid. can. 23. Of the Church . 369 XIX. invented, and grounded upon no warranty of scripture, but rather repugnant to the word of God, art. XXII ; but they, y“ seeing the catholic church taught by the Holy Ghost out of the holy scriptures, and the ancient tradition of the Fathers, in holy councils, and last of all in this general synod, hath taught that there is a purgatory, and that souls there detained are helped by the suffrages of the faithful, but principally by the sacrifices of the acceptable altar; this holy synod commands the bishops, that they would diligently study, that the sound doctrine concerning purgatory, delivered from the holy Fathers and sacred councils, be by Christ's faithful people believed, held, taught and preached every where." And again: z “ This holy synod commands all bishops and others, that have the charge and care of teaching, that accord¬ ing to the use of the catholic and apostolic church, received from the primitive times of the Christian religion, and the consent of the holy Fathers* and the decrees of sacred councils, especially concerning the intercession and invocation of saints, the honour of relics, and the lawful use of images, they dili¬ gently instruct the faithful, teaching that the saints reigning together with Christ do offer up their prayers to God for men, and that it is good and profitable simply to invocate and pray unto them, &c. And that the bodies of the holy martyrs and others that live with Christ are to be worshipped, &c. And also that images of Christ, the God-bearing Virgin, and y Cum catholica ecclesia Spiritu S. edocta, ex sacris literis et antiqua patrum traditione, in sacris conciliis et novissime in hac cecumenica synodo docuerit purgatorium esse; animasque ibi detentas fidelium suf- fragiis, potissimum vero acceptabilis altaris sacrificio juvari, praecipit S. synodus episcopis, ut sanam de pur- gatorio doctrinam a sanctis patribus et sacris conciliis traditam, a Ohristi fidelibus credi, teneri, doceri, et ubi- que praedicari, diligenter studeant. Ibid. Ses. 25. [p. 167.] z Mandat sancta synodus omni¬ bus episcopis et caeteris docendi munus curamque sustinentibus, ut juxta catholicae et apostolicae eccle- siae usum, a primaevis Cliristianae religionis temporibus receptum, sanc- torumque patrum consensionem et sacrorum conciliorum decreta, in- primis de sanctorum intercessione, invocatione, reliquiarum honore, et legitimo imaginum usu, fideles dili¬ genter instruant ; docentes eos, sanctos una cum Christo regnantes orationes suas pro hominibus Deo offerre, bonum atque utile esse sim- pliciter eos invocare, &c. Sanctorum quoque martyrum et aliorum cum Christo viventium corpora, &c. ve- neranda esse, &c. Imagines porro Christi, Deiparae Virginis, et aliorum sanctorum in templis praesertim ha- bendas et retinendas, eisque debitum honorem et venerationem impel tien- dam. Ibid. b b BEVERIDGE. 370 Art. Of the Church. other saints, are to be had and retained, especially in churches, and that due honour and veneration be given to them." 1 '’ And presently, “ a But if any teach or think any thing contrary to these decrees, let him be anathema Seventhly, we say it is a thing plainly repugnant to the word of God, and the custom of the primitive church, to have public prayer in the church, or to administer the sacraments in a tongue not understood of the people, art. XXIV; but they, b “ If any one say that the custom of the church of Rome, whereby part of the canon and the words of conse¬ cration are uttered with a low voice, is to be condemned, or that mass ought to be celebrated only in the vulgar tongue, or that water ought not to be mixed with the wine that is to be offered in the cup, let him be anathema Eighthly, we say there are but two sacraments, art. XXV; they, u c If any one say that the sacraments of the new law were not all instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord, or that there are more or less than seven, to wit, Baptism, Confirmation, the Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Orders, and Matrb mony, or that any of these seven is not truly and properly a sacrament, let him be anathemaC Ninthly, we say, transubstantiation is repugnant to the scripture, and overthroweth the nature of the sacrament, art. XXVIII; but they, d “ But because Christ our Re¬ deemer said^ that that which he offered under the shape of a Si quis autem his decretis con- traria docuerit, aut senserit, ana¬ thema sit. Ibid. b Si quis dixerit ecclesiae Romanae ritum, quo summissa voce pars ca- nonis et verba consecrationis profe- runtur, damnandurn esse, aut lingua tantum vulgari missam celebrari de- here, aut aquam non miscendam esse vino in calice offerendo, eo quod sit contra Christi institutionem, ana¬ thema sit. Ibid. Sess. 22. Can. 9. c Si quis dixerit sacramenta novae legis non fuisse omnia a Jesu Christo Domino nostro instituta, aut esse pluravel pauciora quamseptem, vide¬ licet, baptismum, confirmationem, eucharistiam, poenitentiam, extre- mam unctionem, ordinem, et matri- moniiim, aut etiam aliquod horum septem non esse vere et proprie sa- cramentum, anathema sit. Ibid. Ses. 7. Can. 1. d Quoniam autem Christus re- demptor noster corpus sutim, id quod sub specie panis offerebat, vere esse dixit, ideo persuasum semper in ecclesia Dei fuit, idque nunc deni- que sancta haec synodus declarat, per consecrationem panis et vini conversionem fieri totius substantiae panis in substantiam corporis Christi Domini nostri, et totius substantiae vini in substantiam sanguinis ejus, quae conversio convenienter et prc- prie a sancta catholica ecclesia tran¬ substantiate dicitur. Ibid. Sess. 13. Can. 4. XIX. Of the Church. 371 bread was truly his body* therefore it was always believed in the church of God, and last of all this holy synod doth now declare it, that by the consecration of bread and wine is made the changing of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord, and of the whole substance of wine into the substance of his blood ; which change is fitly and properly called by the holy catholic church transubstantmtion? Tenthly, we say the sacrament of our Lord's supper is not to be worshipped, art. XXVIII; but they, e “ There is there¬ fore no place of doubting left, but that all the faithful of Christ, according to the custom always received in the catholic church, should give to this most holy sacrament, in the adoration of it, that worship of service which is due to the true God." Eleventhly, we say the cup of the Lord is not to be denied to the lay-people, art. XXX; but they, fu If any one say that from the command of God and the necessity of salvation, all and every believer in Christ ought to receive both kinds of the most holy sacrament of the eucharist, let him be ana¬ thema ." Twelfthly, we say, the sacrifices of mass are blasphemous fables and dangerous deceits, art. XXXI; but they, S“ If any one say that in the mass there is not a true and proper sacrifice offered to God, or that to be offered is nothing else but for Christ to be given to us to eat, let him be anathema ." There are many other things wherein the doctrine esta¬ blished by the church of Rome contradicteth ours, as about the marriage of priests, &c. : but these may be enough to shew both the falseness of that calumny that ignorant people put upon our church of England, as if it was returning to e Nullus itaque dubitandi locus relinquitur quin omnes Christi fi- deles, pro more in ecclesia catholica semper recepto, latrise cultum qui vero Deo debetur, huic sanctissimo sacramento in veneratione exhibeant. ibid. c. 5. V. et Can. 6. f Si quis dixerit ex Dei praecepto vel necessitate salutis omnes et sin- gulos Christi fideles utramque spe- ciem sanctissimi eucbaristiae sacra- menti sumere debere, anathema sit. Sess. 21. Can. 1. V. et Can. 2. & Si quis dixerit in missa non offerri Deo verum et proprium sa- crificium, aut quod offerri non sit aliud quam nobis Christum ad man- ducandum dari, anathema sit. Ibid. Sess. 22. Can. 1. b b 2 372 Of the Church. Art. XIX. popery, whereas the doctrine established by our church doth in so many and plain terms contradict the established doctrine of theirs ; and also it shews the truth of this part of our doc¬ trine, that some part of theirs is false. For seeing whatso¬ ever is here set down as the doctrine of our church is grounded upon scripture, consented to by reason, and delivered by the Fathers, it cannot but be true doctrine : and seeing theirs doth so frequently contradict ours, it cannot but in such things that are so contradictory to ours be false doctrine. And therefore we may well conclude, that even the church of Rome too hath erred, yea, in matters of faith, and that if she denies it, she must add that to the rest of her errors. ARTICLE XX. OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCH. The church hath power to decree rites and ceremonies , and authority in controversies of faith. A FTER the nature of the church described, here we have the authority of the church asserted ; which authority extendeth itself to two things, to the decreeing of ceremonies, and to the determining of controversies. And truly this ar¬ ticle is very fitly inserted amongst the rest; for had not the church this power, this convocation in particular which com¬ posed these Articles would have had no power or authority to have composed them, there being several rites decreed, and many controversies decided in them. And therefore was it a great act of prudence in their determining of controversies, to determine this controversy in particular, that they had power to determine controversies; that this controversy being de¬ termined, that they had power to determine controversies, all the other controversies determined by them might be the better relished and received by them for whose sakes they were determined. But this by the bye. What they here determine concern¬ ing the authority of the church (spoken of in the foregoing article) is, that “ the church hath power to decree rites or ceremonies, and authority in controversies of faith.” First, it hath power to decree rites and ceremonies, so that it is lawful for the church to decree and appoint what rites or ceremonies shall be used in the public worship of the great God ; not as parts of that worship a , for then they would not a Indeed it is impossible that mere called; for the worship of God doth rites and ceremonies should be any properly consist in the exercise of part of God’s worship, properly so graces and virtues. In quo quid 37 4 Of the Authority of the Church, Art. be rites and ceremonies. And therefore it is in vain objected by the adversaries to this truth, that herein we give the church power to add any thing to God's worship which is not commanded in his word; as if rites and ceremonies were in themselves any part of worship ; whereas what is any part of God's worship cannot be a mere rite and ceremony ; neither can that which is a mere rite or ceremony be any part of his worship. For rites and ceremonies, in that they are nothing but rites and ceremonies, be in themselves indifferent, neither good nor bad, until determined by the church ; after which determination also they still remain indifferent in themselves, and are good and bad only in reference to their decree who had power and authority to determine them; whereas every the least part of God's worship, in that it is a part of God's worship, can be by no means omitted without sin. And therefore, when it is here said that the church hath power to decree rites and ceremonies, we must always by the words rites or ceremonies understand nothing else but the particular circumstances and customs to be observed in the service and worship of God, not as any cause or part thereof. Secondly, as the church hath power to decree rites and ceremonies, so hath it authority also in controversies of faith. So that whensoever any controversies arise in the church of God concerning any of the articles of faith delivered in the holy scriptures, as, whether Christ be God and man in the same person, whether justification be by faith only or by works also, or the like ; the church hath power and authority to decide the controversy, and to determine which side of the question is most agreeable to the word of God. And that aliud mandatur, nisi ut ei quantum potest commendet diligendumDeum? Hie est Dei cultus, haec vera religio, hsec recta pietas, hsec tantum Deo debita servitus. Aug. de civitate Dei, 1 . io. c. [3.] And the worship of God thus consisting in the loving of him and exercising other graces upon him, no outward circumstances can be any real parts of his worship, that being seated principally in the heart. Whence St. Clirysostome saith of prayer as an act of worship, ’A \\a Kav yovara pr] kXIvtjs, kolv prj (TTTjOos Tv\fsr]s, /ecu ras xelpas els TOU ovpavbv avcLTeivrjs, biavoLav be povov embel^r] Oepprjv to nav aTvrjpTicras rrjs evxos- Chrysost. els rrjv’' A wav \oy.e'. [vol. V. p. 77.] So we may say of all other acts of worship, that it is the heart that is the principal seat of it. And therefore all outward rites and circumstances upon that very account, because they are outward rites and circumstances, cannot be any part of true and proper worship. XX. Of the Authority of the Church. 375 the church hath this power in decreeing ceremonies, and this authority in deciding controversies, is plain and manifest. First, from scripture, where we find St. Paul writing to the church of Corinth, to see that all things be done to edifying , 1 Cor. xiv. 26, and that all things be done decently and in order , ver. 40. Now unless the church of Corinth had power and authority to decree and determine what was edifying, what was decent and orderly, St. Paul would here counsel them to what was impossible or unlawful for them to do. It was impossible for them to see that all things were done to edifying and in order, until they had first decreed what was thus edifying and orderly; and it was unlawful for them to decree it, unless they had power and authority to do it. As for example, whether it was more decent and edifying in their meetings for one to speak after another, or for many to speak together; whether it was more decent and edifying in their breaking of bread for every one to use a different, or for all to use one and the same posture. In these and the like cases, unless they had power to determine what was the most orderly and edifying, St. Paul commanded what was in itself unlawful. But seeing that is blasphemy to say, we must needs grant that the church of Corinth (and so other churches) had power and authority to determine and order these things. Or if they had no such power before, yet St. Paul, or rather the most high God by St. Paul, did in these words grant them such a power and authority, in the decreeing these and the like circumstances and ceremonies, for the more decent and orderly worshipping of the glorious Jehovah, giving them this b one general comprehensive rule, Let all things be done to edifying and in order; out of which b Omnia decenter et ordine. Con- clusio generalior, quae non modo breviter totum statum, sed etiam singulas partes complectitur. Imo regula est ad quam omnia, quse ad externam politiam spectant, exigere convenit. Quoniam sparsim disse- ruerat de ritibus, omnia hie colligere voluit in brevem summam, nempe ut decorum servetur, et vitetur con- fusio. Calv. in loc. Hie ergo locus rite expensus discrimen ostendet inter tyrannica papae edicta, quae conscientias premunt dira servitute, et pias ecclesiae leges, quibus dis- ciplina et ordo continetur. Quin- etiam hinc colligere promptum est, has posteriores non esse habendas pro humanis traditionibus, quando- quidem fundatae sunt in hoc generali mandato, et liquidam approbationem habent quasi ex ore Christi ipsius. Ibid. 376 Of the Authority of the Church. Art. one general rule that and all churches whatsoever, according to the variety of times and places they live in, were to frame other particular rules and canons for the edifying and orderly performance of God’s worship ; who being a God not of con¬ fusion but of order in himself, he requires such worship as is done in order, not in confusion, from us. But this makes only for the church’s power in decreeing ceremonies. But now as for her authority in determining controversies of faith, I think it is plainly and clearly grounded upon and deduced from the practice of the apostles them¬ selves ; amongst whom there arising a controversy, whether it was needful to circumcise the Gentiles and to command them to keep the law of Moses, they presently met together to consider of the matter, Acts xv. 5, 6. And here we see, a controversy being raised, no particular person undertakes the determination of it, but several of them met together, and so made up a council, which was then, as it is now, the repre¬ sentative of the whole church. Well, the church in her representatives being thus met together, they spent some time in disputing about the business, ver. 7, but at last they decide the controversy, ver. 19, 20. From whence we may, yea must certainly conclude, that the church had then power and authority in controversies of faith ; otherwise it durst not have undertaken the decision of so great a one as it did. And if it had that power then, it cannot be denied to have the same still; for it is the same church now that it was then, governed by the same Head now as it was then, directed by the same Spirit now that it was then, enjoys the same scriptures to decide controversies by now as it did then, and therefore cannot be denied to have the same power in decision of controversies now as it had then. Nay, for mine own part, I cannot but look upon the manner of the determination of this controversy intended for a model for the determination of all controversies in after-ages. The apostles were all acted with an infallible spirit, and therefore, one should have thought, might have put a period to that controversy without so many disputes about it, or without calling a council, or the whole church together, for the decision of it. But howsoever, God, to shew that it was not into the hands of private persons, but XX. Of the Authority of the Church. 377 of the church in general, he had committed the determination of all controversies of faith, would not suffer his apostles themselves to end it without the consent of the whole church, or howsoever the greater part of it, which is accounted as the whole. So that it was by the whole church that that con¬ troversy was decided, to shew that the church had power to decide controversies. Neither can I see in reason how this power in ceremonies and controversies should be denied the church. For first, as for ceremonies, they cannot but be acknowledged to be indif¬ ferent, neither in themselves good nor bad; and if they be in themselves either good or bad, and not indifferent, they are not merely ceremonies ; especially if they be in their own nature bad and sinful, they are not the ceremonies intended in this place. For this same article in the following part of it doth determine that the ceremonies here intended are only such as are not against the scripture, and by consequence not unlawful. Now such rites and ceremonies as are in themselves indifferent, it can be no sin to determine them to either part : for which part soever they are determined to, they cannot be determined into sin ; I mean what is in itself indifferent, and so may be used or not used without sin ; whether it be decreed to be used or not to be used, it cannot be any sinful decree; especially when after as well as before the decree they are still acknowledged to be in themselves indifferent, though not as to our use. Which things of indifferency also, as all ceremonies are, cannot be supposed to come within the command of God, for then they would not be indifferent; and seeing God hath not left any particular command, but only a general rule about all things of indifferency, that they be so ordered that they be done decently and to edifying, the church cannot be thought to sin in determining them so as she thinks is the most edifying and decent; as we shall by the blessing of God see more fully in the thirty-fourth article. And if it be no sin thus for the church to determine cere¬ monies, it must needs be granted that she hath power to decree them. But the truth of her power in decreeing ceremonies doth appear also in her authority to determine controversies: for 378 Of the Authority of the Church . Art. if she hath authority to determine controversies, she must needs have a power also to decree ceremonies. For con¬ troversies of faith are of a higher nature than rites and cere^- monies ; and if it be lawful for her to do the greater, it cannot be unlawful to do the less, especially where the less is included in the greater, as it is in this case. For there are few or no rites or ceremonies decreed but what are first controverted; and if it be in the power of the church to determine all con¬ troversies, it must be in her power to determine such con¬ troversies in particular as arise concerning ceremonies. But now that the church hath authority in controversies, is a truth which should it not be granted, it would be impos¬ sible for any controversies to be ever ended. I know the e scripture is the rule of faith, and the supreme judge of all controversies whatsoever, so that there is no controversy of faith ought to be determined but from the scriptures. But I know also, that as all controversies of faith are to be deter¬ mined by the scripture, so there are no controversies of faith but what are grounded upon the scriptures. What is not grounded upon the scriptures I cannot be bound to believe, and by consequence it cannot be any controversy of faith. Hence it is, that as there is scarce an article of our Christian religion but hath been some time controverted, so there is no controversy that ever arose about it but still both parties have pretended to scripture. As for example, that great con¬ troversy betwixt Arius and Athanasius, whether Christ was very God of the same substance with the Father. Arius, he pretended to scripture in that controversy as well as Athana- e The Fathers do frequently call the scriptures the canon or rule of faith. Scriptura sancta doctrinae nostrae regulam figit. Aug. de bono viduitatis, [2. vol. VI.] lias yap ovk dronov vnep pev xprjparcov prj erepois mcrreveiv, aXX’ apidpco, Kal \j/^r](f)(p rovro entrpeneiv, vnep 8e npayparoav yl/rjcfn^opevovs anXcos rats erepcov napacrvpecrdaL 8o£ais, Kal ravra aKpiftr) tpjy'ov dndvra>v e^ovras, Kal yvcopova, Kal Kavova, rd>v 6eicov vopcov ttjv dnocfracrLv; Chrysost. in 2 Corinth. Horn. 13. fi. [vol. III. p. 624.] "On 8e ravra ovrcos eyei, rov Kavova rrjs dXrjdelas, ras deias cfir/pl ypa Xaftoov, saith he, ck T tjs too v koivoov evnpa^las, oat) Ttjs Belas dvvapeoos necjovKe -fcdpLS, tovto npoye ndvroov eKpiva pol npoarjKetv aKOTTelv, OTTCOS TTapd TOtS paKOpiCOTCL - rot? Ttjs Ka@oXiK.rjs eKKXrjalas nXt)@eaL ntaTis pla, teat elXiKpivrjs dydnt), dpoyvoopoov re 7rept tov 7 TayKpartj 6eov evaefieia Tr)pr)TaC aXX’ eneibrj tovt ovx olov t rjv, aKXivtj Ka\ / 3 e- (Balav tol^lv Xafielv, el pt) els tovto ndvroov opov r) too v yovv nXeiovaov emoKonoov avveXBovToov eKaarov, toov npoatjKovToov rrj ayiooraTt) SpeaKeta Su'iKpiais yevoLTo. Euseb. de vita Constantini, 1 . 3. c [17.] And In¬ nocent bishop of Rome, in his Letter to the Clergy of Constantinople, ’AXXa rt Kara toov tolovtoov vvv ev r<5 7 rapovn noirjaoopev ; avayKaxa earl diayvcoois avvodiKt), ijv Kal naXai etprjpev avvaBpoiareav’ povrj yap eanv rjns dvvarai rds Kivt)aeis toov toiovtoov KaracrretXat Karaiyldoov. Soz. 1 . 8. c. 26. & Thus St. Chrysostome observes the Bereans searched the scriptures, that they might know of themselves whether those things were so or no. Kat opa ovx hnXoos, aXXa pera aKpi- (3elas dvrjpevvoov tcis ypatfias’ tovto yap e’crn to aveKpivov, ftovXopevoL an avTciov nXrjpoofooplav pdXXov nepl tov ndSovs Xa(3elv. Chrysost. in Act. Horn. 37. [vol. IV. p. 815.] Of the Authority of the Church. Art. 380 tures, it hath power and authority also to determine contro¬ versies. For the determination of all controversies depends only upon the exposition of the scriptures; according as the scripture is expounded, all controversies are determined. So that which side soever of the controversy the scripture so ex¬ pounded makes for, that is to be acknowledged as the truth, and the other to be rejected as an error. And therefore see¬ ing the church cannot be denied to have power to expound the scriptures, it must needs be granted to have authority in controversies of faith. And this is that which St. Augustine taught long ago. h “ Furthermore,’’’’ saith he, 44 although there is no certain ex¬ ample can be brought out of the canonical scriptures of this thing, yet in this very thing do we hold the truth, when we do that which pleaseth the whole church, which the authority of the scriptures themselves commendeth; that seeing the holy scripture cannot deceive, whosoever fears to be de¬ ceived in the obscurity of this question, (whether heretics are to be again baptized,) let him consult the same church con¬ cerning it, which the scripture demonstrateth without any ambiguity.” As if he should say, In doubtful things, where the scripture is not so clear, consult the church ; for though the question in hand be not clearly decided in the scriptures, yet this is clearly delivered in the scriptures, that the church hath power and authority to decide such questions. But if any one still doubteth about this the authority of the church, let him but consider how the church hath exercised this authority almost ever since it was a church. What council was ever called but it either decreed ceremonies or determined controversies? and what the council doth, the whole church is said to do: whence Athanasius saith, i 44 For the faith which the council confesseth in writing is the faith of the h Proinde quamvis hujus rei cer- tate quaestionis, eandem ecclesiam tum de scripturis canonicis non pro- de ilia consulat, quam sine ulla am- feratur exemplum, earundem tamen biguitate sancta scriptura demon- scripturarum etiam in hac re a nobis strat. Aug. contra Cresc. grammat. tenetur veritas, cum hoc facimus, 1 . i. [39. vol. IX.] quod universal jam placuit ecclesiae, * 'Hi/ yap rj (rvvodos iyypacpoos copo- quam ipsarum scripturarum com- \6yrj(jc ttlcttlv, avrrj rrjs KaOoXiKrjs mendat autoritas: ut, quoniam eKKXTjcrlas ecrrL Athanas. in syn. sancta scriptura fallere non potest, Nic. contra haer. Arrian, decret. quisquis falli metuit hujus obscuri- [27. vol. I. p. 233.] XX. 381 Of the Authority of the Church. catholic church. 1 ’ So that I might demonstrate the truth of this article from the constant practice of the church in all ages, whensoever met together in council. But I shall insist only upon the council of Nice : and certainly if ever the whole church of Christ met together since the apostles 1 times, it was there. k “ For here, 11 as Eusebius saith, “ the principal of the ministers of God of all the churches that filled Europe, Libya, and Asia were met together. 11 So that as Theodoret saith, 1 “ There were three hundred and eighteen bishops assem¬ bled. 11 Sozomen saith, m “ There were about three hundred and twenty bishops, and of presbyters and deacons it seems accompanying of them no small multitude. 11 Nay, Socrates saith, n “ That the presbyters, deacons, and sub-deacons that followed them could not be numbered. 11 And therefore what¬ soever this council did, it must needs be granted to be done by the church of Christ. But what was the reason of the church’s meeting in so glorious a manner ? Why, it is very observable, that it was for the decreeing of a ceremony, and determining of a contro¬ versy. For Socrates saith, ° u For neither were Alexander nor Arius mollified by the letters of the emperor, and there was a great strife and tumult also among the people. And there was also another grievance in some places troubling the churches, viz. the difference about keeping the feast of Easter, which was only in the eastern parts; some striving to have the feast celebrated after the manner of the Jews, others fol¬ lowing all Christians over the world.” And presently, p “ The k Tcov yovv eKK.Xrjcncov dnacrcov, ai rrjv ~Evpconr)v aizacrav Xtfivrjv Te Kal rrjv ’A crlav eTrXrjpovv, opov crvvrjKTO tcov rod Beiov XeiTOvpycov aKpoBlvia. Euseb. de vita Constant. 1.3. c. [7.] 1 ’O/cru) Kal deKa de Kal TpuiKocrioi (TvvrjXdov apxiepe'is. Theodoret. Hist, eccles. 1. 1. c. 7. m ’Hcrav de eivlcrKoiroi imep dpcfil Tpiaieocnoi eucocri, npea(3vTepcov de ko. 1 diaKoveov a)? ehcos enopevcov ovk rjv oXlyov nXrjBos. Sozom. Hist. 1 . 1. c - LGd n ’"Enopevcov de tovtois Trpecrfiv- repcov Kal diaKoveov, clkoXovBcov re nXeiovcov ocrcov erepcov ovde rjv dpi- Bpos. Socrat. Hist. 1 . 1. c. [8.] 0 Ov're yap ’ AXetjavdpos ovre’' Apeios 117rep tcov ypac^evrcov epaXacrcrovro' dXXti rls rj v ciKpLTOs Kal napa rols Xacls epis Kal rapa^rj’ npovTrrjp^e de Kal aXXr] tIs Tvporepa vocros tottiki) ras eKKX-qcrlas TapdrTOvcra, rj dia(f)covla Trjs tov rracrya eopTrjs, rjns irepl ret ~ r / / f 3/ ~ ' 7779 €0X19 pepr] \iovov eyevero, tcov pev y lovda'iKcoTepov tt]v eoprrjv Troielv ecnvovdaKOTcov’ tcov de pipovpevcov crvpnavras tovs Kara rrjv olKovpevr/v Xpianavovs. Socrat. Hist. 1 . 1. c. p.] ,, , , ; P At apcfxrrepa toivvv opcov 6 [ 3 a- criXevs TaparTopevrjv tt)v eKv avvodoov 7 rapa tovtcov 8l ayvcocral ns eOeAoi’ evpot av tt)v pev ev N iKaia e^ovcrav to airiov evXoyov, ray Se a\- Aas 8ia plaos kcil (juXoveLKiav e< ( 3 las crvyKpoTTjOeLeras’ r) pev yap 8ia rrjv ’ApeLavrjv aipeatv naX 8ia to nacr^a 7r * pids rjpepas ndvTas tovs dnavTaxov eniTeXelv. Euseb. in vita Constan- tini, 1. 3. c. [18.] s ’AAAa X (l P LS T< ? Kvplco, oacnrep 7 repX Trjs nlcrTecos, ovtcos KaX nepX rr/s dyias eopTrjs yeyove avpcfiarvia. Athan. Epist. ad episc. African. [2.] XX. Of the Authority of the Church. 383 Lord, we are all agreed concerning the faith and holy feast.” Nay, not content with decreeing it, they (or Eusebius for them) declare also their power and authority to do it, in these words i tu For it is lawful for us to lay aside their rite and custom, and in a truer order and institution, (which we have observed from the first day of the passion unto this present,) to propagate the celebration of this feast to future ages.” Neither did they declare they had power to decree this cere¬ mony only, but others also ; and therefore in their sixth canon they decree, uU That ancient rites and customs should be observed.” Neither did they only decree the ceremony, but decide the controversy also they met about. For the council itself sent a letter to several churches, wherein, as Socrates relates it, they say, vu First of all therefore the wicked and perverse opinions of Arius and his complices were laid open before the most holy emperor Constantine, and with one consent they saw good to anathematize or curse his wicked opinion, and his blasphemous words and names, saying, 4 The Son of God was of nothing, and there was a time when he was not, and that the Son of God is by freedom of will capable of good or evil, and that he is a creature, and made.’ All these things did the holy synod anathematize.” And as Sozomen saith, x “ But you must know that the council determined, that the Son was of the same substance with the Father.” As we may also see in the Creed set forth and confirmed by them. And thus we see how the church of God, met together in the most renowned council that ever was since the apostles'* * "Egecrrt yap tov eKeivcov edovs dnofiXrjdevTOS, ahr)6ecrTcpa Tatjei, rjv CK 7 rpCOTTJS TOV TTCldoVS Tjpepas d-XP L tov napovros e(f)v\d^apev, Kai eni tovs peWovTas alcovas tt]v Trjs im- Trjprja-ecos TavTrjs (rvpn\r)poicriv cktcl- vecrdai. Euseb. in vit. Constant. 1. 3. c ; [18.]^ u Ta apxaia edrj KpareiTco. Concil. Nic. can. 6. [vol. I.] v IIpdoTov pev ovv dnavrcov e^rj- Ta.(T0r) Ta Kard. tt)v acrcrefteiav Kai ttjv napavopiav ’A peiov, teal tcov ervv avTcp, eni napovaia to.v Scoc^lKccttcitov (3a~ criXecos KcovaTavTivov, Kai nap\f/r]- (fiei ebo^ev dvadepaTicrOr/vai n) v d(re(3r) avTOV do^av, Kai tci prjpara Kai Ta ovopaTa to. (3\dcr(fir]pa, tov Yiov tov Qeov Xe'ycov ovk ovtcov, Ka\ elvai 7 rore ore ovk rjv, Kai av- TetjovcnoTrjTL kuklos kol apeTrjs beKTL- kov tov Yiov tov Qeov, Kai KTicrpa Kai non)pa’ anavTa avaOepciTtcrev 1 ) dyia avvobos. Socrat. Hist. 1 . 1. c. [9."] x s Ifrreoi> be on tov pev Yiov opo- ovaiov elvai r&> Hot pi ane(pr)vavTo. Sozom. Hist. 1 . 1. c. [21.] V. et Niceph. 1 . 8 . c. [17,] 18. 384 Of the Authority of the Church. Art. time, did exercise this power in decreeing rites and cere¬ monies, and authority in controversies of faith. I might shew the same thing in many other particulars in this and other councils; but this may be enough to convince any one, that doth not think himself wiser than the whole church of God was at that time, that 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 God's word written, nei¬ ther may it so expound one place of scripture, that it he repugnant to another. Wherefore , although the church he a witness and 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 he believed for necessity of salvation. The authority of the church being asserted in the former part of this article, here are three excellent rules laid down to be observed in her execution of that authority in this; which being all so plain of themselves, I need but touch upon them. And the first is, that it doth not ordain any thing contrary to God's word written, contrary to the scriptures which are the written word of God. Which is a necessary rule to be observed in all decrees and constitutions what¬ soever. For y though ice , or an angel from heaven , saith the apostle, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached, let him be accursed , Gal. i. 8. The word of God is a constant rule for all decrees whatsoever to be framed by. y Quicquid dicat quis, conferen- dum est cum scripturis, quas non ab homine, neque per hominem, sed a Spiritu Sancto per revelationem Jesu Christi acceperunt utloqueren- tur et scriberent homines sancti. Et licet nos aut angelus de coelo evange- lizet vobis, prceter id quod accepistis, anathema sit, et iterum anathema sit. Hoc dictum, haec sententia si¬ militer omnium illorum est, qui neque ab homine, neque per homi¬ nem acceperunt, sed per Spiritum S. Unde scripturse illorum omnes solae canonicse dicuntur et sunt. Rupert, in Mat. 1 . 7. [vol. II. p. 62.] Kat paXa ehcoTQiS' oi yap ayyeXoi, Kav peyaXoi, aXXa 8ov\oi /cat Xeirovp- yo\ Tvyxavovoiv ovres' ai ypa(j)al Tvaaai ov 7 rapa 8ov\a>v, aX\a napa tov tcov oXoov decnroTov ypa tov kcivo- vos tovtov. Chrysost. in Act. hom. 33. [vol. IV. p. 799.] c c 386 Of the Authority of the Church. Art. them, he is far from that canon.’’ 1 c “ We ought therefore, 11 saith Origen, “ for the testimony of the words we produce in doctrine, to produce the sense of the scripture, as it were confirming the sense that we expound. 11 And elsewhere: d “ But afterwards, as it is his custom, the apostle will confirm what he hath said from the holy scriptures, setting also before the doctors of the church an example, that in those things which they speak to the people they do not utter what is presumed upon in their own opinions, but what is strengthen¬ ed by divine testimony : for if he, such and so great an apostle, did not believe that the authority of his words could be sufficient, unless he shews that what he saith is written in the Law and the Prophets, how much more we, the weakest of creatures, ought to observe this, that when we teach, we should not produce our own, but the doctrines of the Holy Spirit I 11 And if in our teaching we ought constantly to follow the scriptures, and whatsoever is contrary to the scriptures ought to be abhorred, it must needs follow, that the church cannot ordain, decree, or so much as teach any thing contrary to the scriptures. That is the first rule. The second is, that the church ought not to expound one place of scripture that it be repugnant to another; but that in all its interpretations of scripture, upon which all the determinations of controversies depend, the analogy e of faith is still to be observed, Rom. xii. 6: which is a rule necessarily also to be observed : for whatsoever is c Debemus ergo ad testimonium verborum, quae proferimus in doc- trina, proferre sensum scripturae, quasi confirmantem quern exponi- mus. Origen. in Mat. horn. 25. d Posthaec vero, ut ei moris est, de scripturis sanctis vult affirmare quod dixerat, simul et doctoribus eccle- siae praebens exemplum, ut ea quae loquuntur ad populum, non pro- priis praesumpta sententiis, sed di- vinis munita testimoniis proferant. Si enim ipse tantus ac tabs aposto¬ lus auctoritatem dictorum suorum sufficere posse non credidit, nisi do- ceat in lege et prophetis scripta esse quae dicit, quanto magis nos minimi hoc observare debemus, ut non no¬ stras cum docemus, sed Spiritus Sancti sententias proferamus ? Id. in Rom. iii. [vol. IV. p. 504.] e That the proportion or analogy of faith here spoken of is not to be taken for the quantity of every man’s faith in particular, but for the rule of faith in general, Salmero himself acknowledged!. Non est intelligen- dum secundum capacitatem et quan- titatem fidei ipsius prophetae, sed secundum generalem rationem fidei, cui annunciandae et elucidandae in- servit. Salm. in Rom. disp. 2. 1 . 4. [vol. I. p. 665.] XX. Of the Authority of the Church. 387 repugnant to any one place of scripture cannot but be false, yea therefore false because repugnant to a place of scripture ; and what is false cannot possibly be given as the exposition of any place of scripture therefore because it is false. So that what is repugnant to one cannot be the exposition of another place of scripture, and what is the true exposition of one place of scripture cannot be repugnant to another : for, asv St. Paul saith, All scripture is given by inspiration of God y 2 Tim. iii. 16: all scripture , one place as well as another. And if every place of scripture be from God, it must needs be true; and therefore also whatsoever exposition of one place contradicts another must needs be false. And therefore it cannot be lawful for the church so to expound one place of scripture as to be repugnant to another; for then it would be lawful to pass false expositions upon the scripture, which would be to belie God, saying that he said that which he never did; nay, saying that he hath said that which he hath gainsaid. And therefore we are not to expound one place of scripture so as to make it repugnant to another, but we are to expound one place of scripture by another, the harder by the easier, the darker by the plainer places. f “ For amongst the things*’ 1 (saith St. Augustine) “ that are clearly contained in scripture are all those things found which contain faith and the manner of living, viz. hope and charity ; of which before. But then, a kind of familiarity with the language of the holy scripture being attained, we must seek to open and discuss such things as are obscure; that for the illustrating of darker speeches, examples be taken from the more manifest, and some testi¬ monies of certain sentences take away doubting about un¬ certain. 11 And again : s“ But when the proper words do make f In iis enim quae aperte in scrip- tura posita sunt inveniuntur ilia omnia quae continent fidem mores- que vivendi, spem scilicet atque charitatem, (de quibus libro supe- riore tractavimus.) Turn vero facta quadam familiaritate cum ipsa lingua divinarum scripturarum, in ea quae obscura sunt aperienda et discutienda pergendum est; ut ad obscuriores locutiones illustrandas de manifesti- oribus sumantur exempla, et quae- dam certarum sententiarum testi- monia dubitationem de incertis auferant. Aug. de doctrina Chris¬ tiana, 1 . 2. [14. vol. III.] £ Sed cum verba propria faciunt ambiguam scripturam, primo provi- dendum est ne male distinxerimus aut pronundaverimus. Cum ergo c c 2 388 Of the A uthority of the Church. Art. XX. the scripture doubtful, we must first have a care that we do not distinguish or pronounce wrongly. When therefore diligence being used, it foresees it is uncertain how it should be distinguished or pronounced, let him consult the rule of faith, which he may perceive from the plainer places of the scriptures and the authority of the church.' 11 And so Clemens Alexan- drinus: h 44 But truth is not found in the changing of sig¬ nifications, for so they overturn all true doctrine ; but in the searching out what is most perfectly proper and becoming to the Lord, and the Almighty God, and in confirming what¬ soever is demonstrated by the scriptures out of the like scriptures. 11 And therefore we must not expound one place of scripture contrary to another, but one place by another. The third rule is, That nothing ought to be enforced as necessary to salvation but what is contained in or may be proved by the scriptures. Which is also a rule necessarily to be observed in the church's executing her authority in the decreeing of rites or ceremonies. Though she may ordain them as necessary to eternal order, yet not as necessary to eter¬ nal happiness, unless they be expressly contained in the scrip¬ tures, or clearly deduced from them. For the scripture doth bear witness for itself, that itself is able to make a man wise to salvation , 2 Tim. iii. 15, which it could not do unless it con¬ tained all things necessary to salvation. 1 44 But all things, 11 as St. Chrysostome saith, 44 that are in the holy scriptures are clear and right; all things necessary are manifest. 11 But of this we have spoken more largely in the sixth article, and therefore need not speak any more to it here. adhibita intentio incertum esse pro¬ vident quomodo distinguendum aut quomodo pronunciandum sit, con- sulat regulam fidei, quam de scriptu- rarum planioribus locis, et ecclesiae autoritate percepit. Ibid. 1 . 3. [2.] h 'H dXrjdeia de ovk ev tu> fierarL- Sevac tci crrjpacvopeva evpicrKercu, ovtco pev yap avaTpey\rovcn nacrav aXrjdr/ didacncaXiav' dXX’ ev rw 8tacnv Oecr- 7T tcdcvTa, bw *i:'i mm vi’inn® rornr-T hdod sip in sin n:\DV 1 ? n-ncrn, i. e. And Ezra’s house of judgment is that which is called the great council or synagogue, which restored the crown {of the law) to its ancient state. Iuchas. fol. 13. And again, is ip ’D 1 ? p is-ip:n □»n ns ■vunnb nvisi m:pn |pnb nvinn pH ns vinnh, And they were called so {viz. the men of the great synagogue) because they were gathered together to confirm consti¬ tutions tending to the directing of the people, and to the restoring or making up the breach of the law. Abarbin. prsef. ad 1. mis mbm. [p. 5.] V.et Joma, fol. 69. 2. See more of this council in the beginning of the sixth article. d Imperator omnibus major, solo vero Deo minor. Tertul. ad Scap. [c. 2. vol. III.] e 2vve^O)S KCIL TOVS (3acn\6LS tt) iaropig TrepiXapAcivoyev, 8 lotl acf) ov XpuTTLavi&iv tjpf-avTO tu tt/s eKicXr)- crlas npaypara rjpTrjTo auriov, kul ai piyiaraL avi / 0S01 tjj avrcov yutopg yeyovacrl re kiu yivovrai. Socrat. hist. 1. 5. prooem. v. Jus G. II. 317. Art. 392 Of the Authority of General Councils. emperors in the history, because that from the time that Christianity began to be professed by them, the business of the church depended upon them, and the great councils both were and still are gathered together by their command or sentence. 1 " Hence is that of St. Hierome : f “ Answer, I de¬ sire thee ; The council by which he was excommunicated, in what city was it l Tell the names of the bishops, produce the sentences of the subscriptions, or their diversity or conso- nancy. Teach us, who were consuls that year, what emperor commanded this council to be gathered together T Not what pope, but what emperor. So that it was the emperors that still commanded the councils to be gathered together. And if we consult ecclesiastical histories, we shall find that there was never an ancient general council but what was gathered together by the command and will of emperors. Let these following, which were the principal if not only general councils that ever were, suffice for the rest. The first general council ever since our Saviour’s time was the Nicene. Now it is plain, that that was gathered together by the command and will of Constantine the Great; so Euse¬ bius, an eyewitness, saith in the life of the said emperor : s “ He , 11 Constantine, “ after this mustering the army of God to himself, gathered together an oecumenical or general council, commanding the bishops from all places by his honourable letters to haste together . 11 And so Socrates : h “ The em¬ peror therefore seeing the church troubled about these two things, he gathered together a general council, calling the bishops from all places by his letters to meet at Nice, a city of Bithynia . 11 And Nicetas: u 1 The emperor, by his public f liesponde quseso, synodus a qua excommunicatus est, in qua urbe fuit ? Die episcoporum vocabula, profer sententias subscriptionum, vel diversitatem vel consonantiam. Doce qui eo anno consules fuerint, quis imperator hanc synodum jusse- rit congregari ? Hieron. Apol. 2. [19. vol. 11.] adv. Ruffin. V. Allat. de consens. 218, 2rp. &c. 8 - Eiff coanep emaTpaTevoov civtm O eov ( paXayya, avvobov olK.ovpeinK.rjv (TvveKpuTei, anevbeiv airavTa^odev tovs emcrKonovs ypapp.acn TLprjTiKo'is 7 rpo- KaXovpevos. Euseb. de vita Constant. 1 . 3 . c. 6 . 11 At apeporepa tolvvv opcov 6 (3a- ai\(vs TaparTopevrjv rrjv eKKXrjcriav, avvobov olKOVp.€VLKrjV aVU€KpUT€l, TOVS navTa^oOev £ttlo'k6ttovs bia ypap.pa- tcop els Ntxatav rrjs BlOvvius anavTrj- crat napaKakeov. Socrat. Hist. 1 . 1. c. [8.] ’ Publico prograinmate imperator XXL Of the Authority of General Councils. 393 letters, commanded that all bishops should come together at Nice, the chief city of Bithynia. 11 And if these particular persons 1 words will not be taken for this truth, we have the whole council itself attesting: for writing a letter to the church of Alexandria, they begin it thus : k “ Seeing that by the grace of God and the command of the most holy emperor, that gathered us together from several cities and provinces, this great and holy council is met at Nice, 11 &c. So then it is cleai- the first general council was gathered together by the emperor, and that Constantine. The second general council met at Constantinople, and that by the command of an emperor too, even Theodosius : for so saith Socrates, speaking of the said emperor; 1 “ But the emperor without delay called together a council of bishops of his faith, to confirm the faith established at Nice, and to ordain a bishop for Constantinople. 11 And Sozomen to the same purpose : m “ And presently the emperor called together a council of bishops of the same judgment with himself, for the confirmation of the Nicene decrees, and for the ordination of one who should be bishop of Constantinople, or oversee the throne of Constantinople, hoping also that those which were called Macedonians might be joined to the catholic church. 11 The third general council was the Ephesine, and that was gathered together by Theodosius the younger. So Evagrius: “ n He likewise desired, 11 saith he, “ that by the command of Theodosius the younger, who then governed the East, the edixit, ut omnes episcopi Nicseam Bithynise metropolim convenirent. Nicet. Thes. 1 . 5. c. 5. k ’E7m§J7 rrjs tov Oeov %dpiros xal tov deov tv N txata do^avTcov, xal % eipoTOvlas tov ptX- XoVTOS t7TiaX07T(lV TOV K(x>VaTaVTLVOV- noXecos Opovov, viroXaQtov re dvvaaOai avvayf/ai ttj xadoXov txxXrjala tovs xaXovp.tvovs Maxedoviavovs. Sozom. Hist. 1 . 7. c. 7. n EIxotcos tdtrjae vevp,aaL tov vtov Qeodoalov Ta axrjnTpa Trjs t(Xas 8 lc- 7TOVTOS, TTjV tv ’E r) ay [a Kal oIkov- fj.GviK.Tj crvvodos tj Kara 8elov vGvpa kcil Becnnafxa tov evae^Gararov vficov Kpdrovs. crvvaSpocadGlcra Kara ravrrjv TTjv 0Gocj)vXaKTOv Kal ftacriXida 7ro- Xiv. Concil. Trul. ad imper. Justin. [Cone. vol. III. p. 1652.] V. Balsam, in canones, [apud Bev. I. p. 153.] x ’E7ri tovto Toivvv Kara kgXgvctlv Trjs crrjs GvaG^GLas 8r] dSvppara, KCti pavuddrj fiaKxtvpara, ra \fstvdo- (Tvyypd.ppa.Ta, ra Kara rd>v rrtTVTutv tiKovcov yivoptva, 8tov doflr/vai tv tco €7TL(TK07rfL(p K(t)V(TTaVTLVOV TToXtOOS' LVCl dnoTtOOxTiv ptrd tcov Xoittwv alpen- Kcbv / 3 i/ 3 AtW. Concil. Nicen. sec. can. 9. [vol. IV. p. 492.] d Verum Christi corpus et sanguis in sacramento altaris sub speciebus panis et vini veraciter continentur, transubstantiate pane in corpus, et vino in sanguinem potestate divina. Concil. Lateran. quart, can. 1. [Cone, vol. II.] 398 Art. Of the Authority of General Councils. by the power of God :” and the council of Constance, that decreed, e “ That no presbyter administer both the kinds, viz. both bread and wine, to the people under the pain of excom¬ munication,” contrary to art. XXX. In the same 1 error also was the council of Basil: which also declared, * “ That the doctrine that asserts the blessed Virgin Mary, by the singular preventing and working grace of God, did not actu¬ ally lie under original sin, but was always free from both original and actual fault, holy and unspotted, is to be approved, held, and embraced as holy doctrine, and consonant to eccle¬ siastical worship, the catholic faith, right reason, and the holy scripture,” contrary to art. IX. and the XVth. The council of Florence declares, h “ That if any being truly penitents depart in the love of God before they have satisfied for their commissions and omissions by the worthy fruits of repentance, their souls are purged in the pains of purgatory,” contrary to Art. XXII. They declared also, ' “ That the sacraments of the New Testament are seven, viz. Baptism, Confirmation, the Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unc¬ tion, Orders, and Matrimony; and that k by virtue of the sacramental words the substance of the bread is changed into the body of Christ, and the substance of the wine into the e Item praeeipimus sub poena ex- communicationis, quod nuttus pres¬ byter communicet populum sub utraque specie panis et vini. Concil. Constant, sess. 13. [vol. VIII.] f Haec sancta synodus decernit et declarat, quod fideles laici communi- cantes et non conficientes non astringuntur ex praecepto Domini, ad suscipiendum sub utraque specie, panis scilicet et vini, sacrum eucha- ristiae sacramentum. Concil. Basil, sess. 30. [Ibid.] s Doctrinam illam disserentem, gloriosam virginem Mariam, prae- veniente et operante divini Numinis gratia singulari, nunquam actualiter subjacuisse originali peccato, sed immunem semper fuisse ab omni originali et actuali culpa, sanctamque et immaculatam, tanquam piam et consonam cultui ecclesiastico, fidei catbolicae, rectae rationi, et sacrae scripturae approbandam fore et te- nendam et amplectendam definimus et declaramus. Ses. 36. [Ibid.] h Item, si vere poenitentes in Dei charitate decesserint, antequam dig- nis poenitentiae fructibus de corn- missis satisfecerint et omissis, eorum animas poenis purgatorii purgari. Concil. Florent. de purg. [vol. IX. P- 957-1 1 Novae legis septem sunt sacra- merita, scilicet baptismus, confirma- tio, eucharistia, poenitentia, extrema unctio, ordo et matrimonium. Ibid, [p. 437.] et in concil. Lateran. 5. k Nam ipsorum verborum virtute substantia panis in corpus Christi, substantia vini in sanguinem con- vertuntur; ita tamen quod totus Christus continetur sub specie panis, et totus sub specie vini; sub quali- bet quoque parte hostiae consecratae et vini consecrati, separatione facta, totus est Christus. Ibid. [p. 439.] XXI. Of the Authority of General Councils. 399 blood : yet so as that Christ is wholly contained under the form of bread, and wholly under the form of wine; yea, and under every part of the consecrated host and consecrated wine, after separation, the whole Christ is contained both con¬ trary to art. XXIV. But it would be an endless thing to reckon up the many errors of the papistical, falsely called general and oecumenical councils. Some of the many errors of the Tridentine council I have written down, art. XIX. Many more, both of that and other councils, I might record here: but these already rehearsed are both great and many enough, from whence to conclude, that general councils may, yea, and have erred. ARTICLE XXII. OF PURGATORY. The Romisli doctrine concerning purgatory, pardons , worshipping and adoration, a.s well of images as of relics, and also invocation of saints, is a fond thing vainly invented, and grounded upon no warranty of scripture, hut rather repugnant to the Word of God. I N this article we have several of the Romish inventions crowded up together. I shall single them out one after another, that so, though I speak but briefly, I may speak clearlv to them all. And first therefore to encounter with that which stands in the forefront of the battle, and that is Purgatory ; of which it is here said, that the Romish doctrine concerning it is a fond thing, repugnant to the Word. Now to handle this aright, there are two things to be done; first, to shew what is the Romish doctrine concerning it; and secondly, to shew what a fond and false thing it is. As for the first, what the Romish doctrine concerning purgatory is, I think it cannot be better explained than by the Romish doctors themselves, who tell us in the council of Trent, au If any one say, that after the grace of justification received, the fault is so pardoned to every peni¬ tent sinner, and the guilt of eternal punishment is so blotted out, that there remains no guilt of temporal punishment to be a Si quis post acceptam justificati- exolvendae vel in hoc saeculo, vel in onis gratiam, cuilibet peccatori poe- futuro in purgatorio, antequam ad nitenti ita culpam remitti, et reatuin regnuin ccelorum aditus patere pos- aeternae pcenae deleri dixerit, ut nul- sit, anathema sit. Concil. Trident, lus reinaneat reatus pcenae temporalis sess. 6. c. 30. [vol. X. p. 43.] to rut.OjQstbvor f CUny* Zd oC y *y. ■estLCit&AUA. 7 03 ^^ f • rr Augustana College Sc Theol. Historical Sketch C* O Rock I el. 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1872 1882 1892 1902 1912 1922 1873 1883 1893 1903 1913 1923 1874 1884 1894 4 1904 1914 1924 1875 1885 1895 1905 1915 1925 187G 1886 1896 1906 1916 1926 1877 1887 1897 1907 1917 1927 1878 1888 1898 1908 1928 1879 1889 1899 1909 1919 1929 The Administrative Library has those that are checked Ill. 6 University of Illinois, President’s Office XXII. Of Purgatory. 40} done away in this world, or that which is to come in purga¬ tory, before the passage can be opened into heaven, let him be accursed.’ 1 And elsewhere they say, b “ There is a purgatory, and that the souls detained there are helped by the suffrages of the faithful, but principally by the sacrifices of the accept¬ able altar.” So that, as Bellarmine saith, c “ Purgatory is a certain place, in which, as in a prison, the souls are purged after this life, which were not fully purged in this life, to wit, that so they may be able to enter into heaven, where no unclean thing enters in.” Thus we see in few words what the Romish doctrine con¬ cerning purgatory is. Now that this doctrine is a fond thing is plain, in that by d the confession of some of their own writers there is little or no footing for it in the scriptures; nay, if we examine it by scripture light, we shall find it so far from being grounded upon scripture, that it is directly contrary to it; for the scriptures say, The dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten. Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun, Eccles. ix. 5, 6: whereas this doctrine saith quite contrary, that when they are dead they have a part or portion in the prayers of the faithful and the sacrifices of the altar. Again, the scripture makes mention but of a twofold receptacle of souls after death, the one of happiness, the other of misery, 1 Sam. xxv. 29. Matt. vii. 13, 14. viii. 11. Luke xvi. 22, 23: whereas this doctrine brings in a third, called Purgatory, betwixt heaven b Purgatorium esse, animasque ibi detentas fidelium suffragiis, potissi- mum vero acceptabilis altaris sacri- ficio juvari. Ibid. sess. 25. init. [Ibid, p. 167.] c Purgatorium est locus quidam, in quo tanquam in carcere post hanc vitam purgantur animae, quae in hac vita non fuerunt plene purgatae, ut nimirum sic in ccelum ingredi va- leant, quo nihil intrabit coinquina- tum. Bellar. de purgat. 1. 1. c. 1. [vol. II. p. 699.] d Quanquam fortassis unam ali- quam scripturam, quae protervien- tem adigat, ut velit nolit confiteatur purgatorium, in promptu non sit adducere; potest esse nihilominus illic aliqua, tametsi diligentissimos inquisitores hactenus ilia latuerit. Roffen. contra Luth. art. 37. [Fis¬ cher. p. 718.] Minus apertas, minus efficaces esse, et minus probare au- toritates scripturae quae a doctoribus afferuntur, illis itaque non esse uten- dum ad probandum purgatorium. Petrus a Soto de instruct, sacerd. lect. 1. [p. 205.] D d BEVERIDGE, 402 Of Purgatory . Art, and hell, half happiness and half misery. Again, the scrip¬ ture saith, The blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth, or purgeth us from all sin, 1 John i. 7; but this doctrine would persuade us, there are some sins which are to be purged away by the prayers and good works of others. To name no more, the scripture saith, He that believeth shall not come into condem¬ nation, but pass from death to life, John v. 24 ; and therefore St. Paul saith, e I am in a strait between two, having a desire to depart and to be with Christ, Phil. i. 23. So that St. Paul reckoned verily upon it, that so soon as ever he was dead he should be with Christ, no sooner absent from the body but present with the Lord, 2 Cor. v. 8 . Whereas this Romish doc¬ trine about purgatory bids him not to be so hasty, for he might depart and yet not be with Christ neither; he might pass from death, and yet not to life; he might and must be absent from the body a good while before he be present with the Lord; he might go from earth yet not to heaven, but to purgatory, a place St. Paul never dreamed of. So that this doctrine directly contradicts the scripture. The scriptures say, we shall pass from death to life; this doctrine saith we shall not pass from death to life, but to purgatory: the scrip¬ ture, that when we are absent from the body we are present with the Lord; but this doctrine, when we are absent from the body we are not present with the Lord: the scripture, that when we depart we shall be with Christ; this doctrine, that when we depart we shall be in purgatory : the scriptures, that we must go directly from earth to heaven; but this doc¬ trine, that we must go about by purgatory, first going from life to death, then from death to purgatory, and from purga¬ tory to heaven. And as this doctrine herein doth contradict the scriptures, so doth it contradict the Fathers too. For Origen saith, fu We, after the labours and strivings of this present life, e Christum lsedimus cum evoca- tienter dolemus, ipsi consequi nolu- tos quosque ab illo quasi miseran- mus. Tertull. de patientia, c. 9. dos non sequanimiter accipimus. [vol. IV. p. 79.] Cupio, inquit apostolus, recipi et ^ At a tovto rjp-eis ptra tovs evrav- esse cum Christo. Quanto melius 6a tvovovs Ka\ tovs ayccvas ekivL^opev ostendit votum Christianorum ? Er- npos av ayoovoov, Kal toov decrpcov dvl- evrai’ Kal yap perdaraais tls ecrri tois evaperoos &Lodaiv and toov ^ eipo - viov enl to. /3eAria), ano ttjs npoaxal- pov >r)s enl ttjv dir/vexT/ Kal dOavarov Kal nepas ovx e^ovaav. Chrysost. in h "Orav e^kXdcocnv and rod croopa- tos , oi X°P OL dyyeXoov napaXap- (3avovcriv avroov tcis y/sv^as els to dl'diov pepos, els tov KaOapov aldova , Kal ovtoos avrovs npoadyovai too Kx>- p'lco. Macar. fEgyp. hom. 22. 1 O vk eari yap napa rols dcxaloLs Bdvaros, dXXa peraOeats' peraridev- rai yap e#c rod Koapov tovtov els ttjv aldoviov dvdnavcriv' Kal cocrnep tis dno (fovXaKrjs e£eX6oi, ovtoos Kal oi dyioL e^epxovrai and tov po)(6r)pod (3lov tovtov els ra dyaOci tci r]TOipacrpeva avTols. Athanas. de virgin. [18. vol. II. p. 120.] k Post ascensionem Domini ad coelos, omnium sanctorum animae cum Christo sunt, et exeuntes de corpore ad Christum vadunt, ex- pectantes resurrectionem corporis sui. Gennad. de eccles. dogmat, c. 79. 1 Quia secundum scripturae sacrae sermonem, tota humana vita tenta- tio est super terrain, tunc est ten- tatio fugienda, quando finitur et pugna: et tunc est finienda pugna, quando post hanc vitam succedit pugnae secura victoria, ut omnes milites Christi, qui usque in finem vitae praesentis divinitus adjuti, suis hostibus indefatigabiliter restiterint, laboriosa jam peregrinatione trans- acta, regnent felices in patria. Prosp, de vita contempt 1.1. c. 1. d d 2 404 Of Purgatory. Art. the language of the holy scriptures, the whole life of man upon earth is a temptation or trial. Then is the temptation to be avoided when the fight is ended; and then is the fight to be ended, when after this life secure victory succeeds the fight, that all the soldiers of Christ, who, being helped by Cod, have to the end of this present life unweariedly resisted their enemies, their wearisome travail being ended, they may reign happily in their country.” So that they do not go from one fight here to another in purgatory, but immediately from the church militant on earth to the church triumphant in heaven. From whence we may well conclude, that the Romish doctrine about purgatory is a fond thing , repugnant to scripture , yea, and Fathers too. And therefore I pass from the Romish doctrine concerning Purgatory to that Concerning Pardons. And here (and also in the rest of the Romish doctrines spoken of in this article) I shall follow the same method as I did in Purgatory, even to shew, first, what their doctrine is, and then, how repugnant to the scriptures. As for the first, what their doctrine concerning pardons is, it is difficult to determine; they have had so many crotchets about it, that one can scarce tell where to find them. I shall endeavour to explain it in these following propositions : First, they assert, as m Bellarmine saith, u That many holy men have suffered more for Cod and righteousness’’ sake than the guilt of the temporal punishment, which they were ob¬ noxious to for faults committed by them, could exact.” Secondly, hence they say, as Johannes de Turrecremata, n “ That one can satisfy for another, or one can acceptably perform satisfactory punishments for another,” viz. because they suffer more than is due to their own sins; and seeing all sufferings are satisfactory, what they undergo more than is due to their own, is satisfactory for other men’s sins. % m Asserimus non paucos sanctos dulg. [vol. III. p. 1498.] homines multo plura propter Deum n Unus pro alio satisfacere potest, et justitiam esse perpessos, quam sive unus poenam satisfactoriam pro exigeret reatus poenae temporalis, cui alio potest explere Deo acceptabi- fuerunt obnoxii propter culpas ab liter. Johan, de Turrec. art. 2. ipsis commissas. Bellarm. de in- concl. 1. XXII. Of Purgatory . 405 Thirdly, ° “ Seeing they who thus undergo satisfactory punishments for others do not appoint the fruit of this their satisfaction to any particular persons, it therefore, 1 ’’ as Roffen- sis saith, “ becomes profitable to the whole church in common, so that it is now called the common treasury of the church, to wit, that from thence may be fetched whatsoever any one lacks of due satisfaction. 11 Fourthly, P “ This common treasure, 11 saith Bellarmine, “ is the foundation of pardons. 11 So that, as he saith, c i “ The church hath power to apply this treasure of satisfaction, and by this to grant out pardons. 11 By this therefore we may have some sight into this great mystery, and perceive what they mean by pardons. For, as Lamannus the Jesuit saith, r “ A pardon or indulgence is the remission of a temporal punishment due to God without the sacrament, by the application of the satisfaction of Christ and the saints. 11 Or as Gregorius de Valentia saith, s “ An ec¬ clesiastical pardon or indulgence is a relaxation of a temporal punishment by GocTs judgment due to actual sins, after the remission of the fault made without the sacrament (of penance) by the application of the superabundant satisfactions of Christ and the saints by him who hath lawful authority to do it. 11 But let us hear what a pope himself saith concerning these pardons. Leo the Xth in his Decretal, ann. 1518, saith, t “ The pope of Rome may for reasonable causes grant to the ° Et quoniam illi suae satisfactio- nis fructum nullis destinarunt per- sonis certis, ideo fit ut in commune cesserit ecclesiee totius emolumen- tum, et communis ecclesiae thesau¬ rus jam dicatur, nimirum ut inde rependatur quicquid caeteris ex justa satisfactione defuerit. [Fischer, e- pisc.] Roffens. art. 17. [p. 491.] p Extat thesaurus aliquis in ec- clesia qui est fundamentum indul- gentiarum. Bellarm. de indulg. 1 . 1. c. 2. [tit.] acnv tov Oeov Xicrai bvva- tos r) v > Kai acfrelvai n)v apaprlav, yeypappevov rzapa rots 7Tpo(f)r] Tal s> on tovto Oeov e'crn ; tis yap Oeos coanep crv e^aipwv apaprias k at imep- fiaivtov avoplas ; 6 pev yap Oeos ehre, yrj ei, iea\ els yrjv uTreXevar]' ol be avOpamoi yeyovacri SurjTot’ 7 tcos yap olov re t]i/ napa rcov yevvrjTOdV XvOrjvai tt)v apaprlav ; dXX’ eXvae ye avros 6 Kvpios. Athanas. contra Arrian, orat. [2. p. 535.] d Imagines porro Christi, deiparae virginis, et aliorum sanctorum in templis praesertim habendas et re- tinendas, eisque debitum honorem et venerationem impertiendam. Con- cil. Trident, sess. 25. [vol. X.] XXII. Of Purgatory. 409 the images of Christ, the Blessed Virgin, and other saints, are to be had and retained, especially in churches, and that due honour and worship be given to them. 11 And presently, e “ Because the honour which is given to the images is referred to the prototypes which they represent; that by the images which we kiss, and before which we uncover our heads and fall down, we adore Christ, and worship the saints whose likeness they bear. 11 But Azorius tells us, f “ It is the constant opinion of their divines, that the image ought to be honoured and worshipped with the same honour and worship wherewith that is worshipped which it is the image of. 11 And so Bellarmine saith, s “ That the images of Christ and the saints are to be worshipped, not only by accident and im¬ properly, but by themselves and properly; so that themselves terminate the worship as they are considered in themselves, and not only as they represent that which they are the image of. 11 And Petrus de Cabrera to the same purpose ; h “ Images are truly and properly to be worshipped, and from an intention of worshipping them, and not only the samplers represented in them. 11 Yea, he tells us, 1 “ That if images are worshipped only improperly, simply and absolutely they are not worshipped at all, neither are they to be worshipped, which is a manifest heresy. 11 Now what doctrine can possibly be invented to cross and contradict the scriptures more plainly than this doth ? The scriptures expressly saying, yea, the great God in thunderings e Sed quoniam honos qui exlii- cidens vel improprie, sed etiam per betur, refertur ad prototypa quae se et proprie, ita ut ipsae terminent illae repraesentant : lit per imagines venerationem ut in se considerantur, quas osculamur, et coram quibus et non solum ut vicem gerunt ex¬ caput aperimus, et procumbimus, emplaris. Bellarm. de imagin. 1 . 2. Christum adoremus, et sanctos, c. 21. quorum illae similitudinem gerunt, h Imagines sunt vere et proprie veneremur. Ibid. adorandae et ex intentione ipsas a- f Constans est theologorum sen- dorandi, et non tantum exemplaria tentia imaginem eodem honore et in ipsis repraesentata, Pet. de cultu honorari et coli, quo colitur id Cabrera in tert. part. Thom, quaest. cujus est imago. Atque haec sen- 25. art. 3. disp. 2. num. 32. tentia non tantum unius Thomae sed 1 Si imagines improprie tantum communi est theologorum consensu adorantur, simpliciter et absolute recepta. Azor. 1 . 9. instit. c. 6. art. non adorantur, neque sunt ado- 3, 6. randae, quod est haeresis manifesta. e Imagines Christi et sanctorum Ibid. num. 34. venerandae sunt, non solum per ac- 410 Of Purgatory. Art. and lightnings commanding, Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image , or the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above , or that is in the earth beneath , or that is in the waters under the earth : thou shalt not bow down thyself to them , nor worship or serve them. Exod. xx. 4, 5. For what image can possibly be made, and yet not come within the compass of this law? There is nothing in the world but it is either in heaven, or on earth, or under the earth; and so nothing in the world but the image of it is here expressly forbidden to be worshipped. I know the abettors and practisers of this Romish doctrine would persuade us, that the worshipping of heathenish idols is here only forbidden, not the adoration of images. But I could wish such seriously to consider with themselves that it is here said, Thou shalt not make to thyself the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above , or earth beneath ; so that they are things which we are here forbidden to worship the image or likeness of: whereas we know an idol is nothing in the world , 1 Cor. viii. 4 : and therefore it is not heathenish idols only that are here forbidden, but Christian idols also ; I mean all images whatsoever, unless they will find out images of things that are neither in heaven, nor earth, nor under the earth, that is, images of nothing. But we know the images they worship are the images of real things, of Christ, of the Virgin Mary, of saints; all which are somewhere; and therefore their images are expressly forbidden to be worshipped here. And howsoever the subtle doctors of the Romish church may make the ignorant people believe that it is only the heathenish idols that are here intended, I am sure the ancient k Fathers of the catholic Church looked upon all images whatsoever as here forbidden. k Quae nunc Dei sermo universa in spiritu ? Nec enim imagines eo- complectens simul abjurat et abjicit, rum vel statuas populus habuisset, et non solum idolum fieri vetat, sed lege prohibente. Tertull. adv. Mar- et similitudinem omnium quae in cion. 1. 4. c. 22. "Slanep M wverrjs terra sunt et in aquis et in coelo. nponaXcu diapprjdrjv evopoOerrjcrev, Origen. in Exod. [vol. II. p. 158.] prjdep dew yXvnrop, r) ^ copevrop, fj Ovfi Qeos rj v o epreiXapepos did Moo- 7 tXcuttop, rj ypcmrop nyaXpd re Ka\ tree or, prjre eiKova, prjre opoiarpa, prjre direiKOPicrpa noieladai, cos prj rols at- rcop ep ovpavw avoi, prjre rcov eVi yrjs aOrjroiis Trpoaave^opev, en\ 8e ra vo- o\a>s noirjo-cu : Justin. Dial, cum rjrci perLcopev. Clem. Alex. Stromat. Tryphone [94.] Quomodo enim 5. [p. 662.] To which we may also Moysen et Hiliam cognovisset nisi add that of Josephus, 'O devrepos TTG)v poptfiovpevos, (OS icar ei-Kova tj tl va crvp(3oXa itctivov yiyvopevais' dibnep evBecos Xeycrcu ra nepi dyaXparcov, otl ovk elari deol, Kai to. Trepl T(bv tolovtcov drjpLOvpyrjpaTCOV, otl ovk elcri avyKpiTa 7 rpos tov drj- pLovpyov. Origen. contra Cels. 1 . 3. [ 4 °-] 0 Ou Tipcopev ra dyaXpara, Kai 8 La to prj, to bcrov e(p' rjplv, KaTaTviiTTeLV fls InroXrjyj/Lv tt)v nepi tov eivaL ra dyaXpara Bcovs erepovs. Origen. contra Cels. 1 . 7. [c. 66.] P O vbcplav eiKova 6 Mcovcrps 7 ra- payytXXei noielaBai tols dvdpcoiroLs, avTLTexvov rai 0 fc 5 . Clem. Alex. Peedag. 1 . 3. c. 2. £p. 258.] 1 Si quis imagines facere voluerit, minime prohibe ; adorare vero ima¬ gines omnibus modis devita. Greg. Mag. Epist. 1 . [XI. ep. 13. vol. II.] r Quare non est dubium quin re- ligio nulla est ubicunque simulacrum est. Nam si religio ex divinis rebus est, divini autem nihil est nisi in c?elestibus rebus, carent ergo reli- gione simulacra, quia nihil potest esse caeleste in ea re quae fit ex terra. Lactant. de orig. error. [ 1 . II. c. 19.] XXII. Of Purgatory. 413 fore there is no doubt but there is no religion wheresoever there is an image. For if religion be of divine things, and yet there is nothing divine but [in] heavenly things ; there¬ fore images want religion, because there can be nothing heavenly in that thing which is made of the earth.” Or if they will not stand to the determination of the Fathers, let them refer it to councils, and they will find the Elibertine council determining, s “ That pictures or images ought not to be in the church, lest that which is worshipped and adored should be painted upon the walls."” And a council held at Constantinople, consisting of 338 bishops, anno Dom. 754, determined unanimously, 1 “ That every image, made of what matter soever by the wicked art of the painter, be thrown out of Christian churches as strange and abominable."” But there being another council held at Nice not many years after, it did as much extol images as the other had destroyed them, as we saw in the foregoing article. But not long after, Charles the Great gathered together the bishops of France, Germany, and Italy, into a council at Franckford, where, as Regino saith, u “ the false synod of the Grecians, which they made for the worshipping of images, was rejected/’’ I know this synod did condemn the Constantinopolitan council too before spoken of, because they stretched it too far, not only commanding that images should not be worshipped, but that they should not be used so much as for the ornament of the church. But as they condemned the Constantinopolitan council for throwing them quite out of the church, so did they condemn too the second council of Nice, for commanding them to be worshipped in the church. For not only Regino, before quoted, but Hincmarus Remensis expressly saith, x “ Wherefore in the time of the emperor Charles the Great, 8 Placuit picturas in ecclesia esse non debere, ne quod colitur aut adoratur in parietibus depingatur. Concil. Elibert. cap. 36. [Hard. Cone. vol. I.] t Una voce definimus omnem imaginem, ex quacunque materia improba pictorum arte factam, ab ecclesia Christianorum rejiciendam, veluti alienam et abominabilem. Act. Concil. Constant. [Id. vol. IV. p. 725.] u Pseudosynodus Graecorum quam pro adorandis imaginibus fe- cerunt, rejecta est. Regino in Chron. [vol. I. p. 31.] x Tempore Caroli magni impera- toris, jussione apostolicae sedis, ge- neralis synodus in Francia, convo- cante praefato imperatore celebrata. 414 Of Purgatory. Art. by the command of the apostolical seat, a general council was celebrated in France, the said emperor gathering it to¬ gether ; and according to the way of the scriptures, and the tradition of the ancients, the false synod of the Grecians was destroyed and utterly cast off” To which we may add the book, attested by sufficient witnesses to be written by the said Charles the Great against the Nicene council, and wor¬ shipping of images ; wherein he calls >' 44 the religious worship of images a most insolent, or rather most superstitious and accursed adoration.” And not only so, but the same renowned emperor sent the determinations of the said council into 7 Britain, to keep them from that gross idolatry too. And the worshipping of images was condemned again in another council at Constantinople, an. 814: and in another council, held at Paris, an. 824, under Lodovicus, the son and immediate suc¬ cessor of Charles the Great, it was again determined, as in the council of Franckford, that it was lawful to have images, but unlawful to worship them. So that it is no new thing that our reverend convocation did, when they determined that the worshipping of images is a fond thing, and repugnant to the Word of God. And what is said concerning worshipping of images is said also Concerning the worshipping of Relics. What we are to understand by relics in this place, Stapleton tells us, a 44 Even not only every part or particular of a saint's body, but even his garments, or any thing else which he used.” And Bellarmine tells us, b 44 The very cross upon et secundum seripturarum tramitem traditionemque majorum, ipsa Grae¬ corum pseudosynodus destructa et penitus abdicata est. Hincmar. Rhemen. 1 . contra Ilincmar. Lau- dun. c. 20. [vol. II. p. 457.] y Cultum religiosum imaginum insolentissimam vel potius supersti- tiosissimam execrandamque adora- tionem. Carol. Mag. 1 . 2. c. 13. z Carolus rex Francorum misit librum synodalem ad Britanniam, in quo vene fidei multa reperta sunt obviantia, et eo maxime quod pene omnium orientalium doctorum una- nimi assertione est definition, ima¬ gines adorari debere, quod omnino ecclesia catholica execratur. Mat. Westmonast. ad an. 793. a Ad reliquias alicujus sancti per- tinetnon solum quaelibet sui corporis particula, sed etiam vestes, aut ali- quod aliud quo usus fuerat. Staplet. part. 1. Prompt, cath. b Crux ilia vera in qua Dominus pependit, propter contactum sacri XXII. Of Purgatory . 415 which the Lord hung, by reason of its touching his sacred body and blood, is to be reckoned amongst the most precious relics; and not only the whole, but every piece of it.” And what the Romish doctrine concerning these relics is, we may see in several of their writers. Jodocus Coccius tells us, c “ The relics of the saints are to be religiously preserved and worshipped.” Johannes de Turrecremata, d “ That the relics of the cross, nails, spear, garments, and the image of Christ crucified, are to be worshipped with latriaf or the same worship that is proper to the true God. To name no more, the council of Trent declares, e “ That the holy bodies of the holy martyrs, and others that live with Christ, which were the living members of Christ, and the temples of the Holy Ghost, to be raised up by him to eternal life and glorified, are to be worshipped by the faithful, by which many benefits are performed to men. So that all such as affirm that honour and worship ought not to be given to the relics of the saints, or that they and other monuments are unprofitably honoured by the faithful, and that for the obtaining of their help the memories of the saints are vainly frequented, are to be altogether condemned.” Now, what need we to retort to the upholders of these doc¬ trines more than what our Saviour did to the Devil, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God , and him only shalt thou serve f Matt. iv. 10. If God be alone to be served and worshipped, what worship can be due to these so venerable relics ? What is it less than sacrilege, to give that glory to the creature which is due only to the corporis et sanguinis, inter preti- osissimas reliquias habenda est, nec solum ipsa integra sed etiam parti- cuke ejus. Bellar. de imag. 1 . 2. c. 26. [vol. II.] c Sanctorum reliquias religiose servandas et colendas esse. Jod. Coccius, Thes. 1 . 5. art. 16. [tit.] d Reliquiae crucis, clavorum, lanceae, vestium Christi, et imago crucifixi sunt latria veneranda. Joh. de Turrec. in festo invent, crucis, q- 3- e Sanctorum quoque martyrum et aliorum cum Christo viventium sancta corpora, quae viva membra fuerint Christi, et templa Spiritus Sancti, ab ipso ad aeternam vitam suscitanda et glorificanda, a fidelibus veneranda esse, per quae multa be- neficia a Deo hominibus praestantur. Ita ut affirmantes sanctorum reliquiis venerationem atque honorem non deberi, vel eas aliaque sacra monu- menta a fidelibus inutiliter honorari, atque eorum opis impetrandae causa sanctorum memorias frustra fre- quentari, omnino damnandos esse. Concil. Trident, sess. 25. [vol. X. p. 168.] 41(J Of Purgatory. Akt. Creator ? St. Paul reproves the Romish heathens for wor¬ shipping the creature more than the Creator , Rom. i. 35. Certainly the same reproof may reach to the Romish Christ¬ ians too. For what is due only to the Creator, they are not ashamed nor afraid to give it to the creature, and so either making God a creature, or the creature a god, by giving no more to God than they give to the creatures, nor less to the creatures than they give to God. They can give no more than religious worship to God, and that they give to the creatures, and so must needs bring either the glory of God down, so as to be no higher than the glory of a creature, or the glory of the creature up, so as to be no lower than the glory of God, by making God and the creature to be sharers in the same honour. Let them therefore tell me, are these relics creatures or no ? If they will assert and prove them to be no creatures, they may well be worshipped ; and if they worship them, they do in that assert them to be no creatures : for certainly f none but God ought to be worshipped; and whatsoever may be truly worshipped is God. If they may be worshipped, they are not creatures ; and if they be not creatures, they ought to be worshipped. I say therefore, are these relics creatures or no 1 Are they creatures, did I say ? Certainly if they were not, our adversaries would never contend so much that they ought to be worshipped ; for we can scarce find any of them spending so much time in proving that Jehovah, the Creator, should be worshipped, as they do in proving that images and relics, and almost any thing besides God, ought to be wor¬ shipped. But let them at the length bethink themselves, whether in reason their bodies should be worshipped, whose f And thus we find the Fathers themselves using the argument both ways; sometimes saying such a thing is to be worshipped, and therefore it is God, and such a thing is not God, and therefore it ought not to be worshipped : as, El fiiv yap ov npocncvv-qrov , 7 rcos epe Oeoi dia tov f3aiTTLcr paros; el de npocr- kvvtjtov, ttws ov crenTov ; el 8e crenrov, ncos ov Oeos; ev r/pTijrai tov evos’ \pv(T7] tis ovtuss aeipa Kal acoTrjpLos. Greg. Nazianz. [vol. I. p. 609.] orat. 37. de Spir. S. To pev yap 7 rpoo-Kvvelv tt}s Krlcrecos, to 8e npoa- KvveiaOai tov tt/s KTiaecos decnroTov. Chrysost. in Joh. horn. 33. [vol. II. p. 687. 39.] And on the other side, Ei yap ovk ecrTtv aXrjOivos 6 Oeos ovre 7 rpocncvvrjTos eVn* Ka'i el eari ktlo-tos, ov Oeos’ Ka'i el ovk eVri 7rpoo m Kvvr]T6s > 7 Tcos apa OeoXoyelTai ; Epiphan. in Arium. [adv. haeres. II. ii. vol. I. P- 755-1 XXII. Of Purgatory. 417 souls, for ought they know, may be in hell ? or whether in reason any part of that cross should be worshipped upon which Christ was crucified? The cross was the wicked in¬ strument which the Jews used to put our Saviour to death ; what ? and must that be now worshipped by such as profess faith in him that was crucified upon it ? And are the nails that fastened his hands and feet to the cross, and the spear that pierced his sides, such honourable things that they must be worshipped too ? How comes such honour to be conferred upon these nails and this spear ? What ? because they were the instruments of our Saviour's death and greater torments ? Oh most horrid impiety, and unparalleled idolatry, that Christians should worship that which tormented and destroyed Christ ! that we should worship that in our life, that brought our Saviour himself to death ! And if they will not believe us> that no relics, but God only is to be worshipped, let them consult the Fathers, and see their opinion in it. And if they will not take the pains to look themselves into the Fathers, I hope they will not be angry if I tell them that Justin Martyr saith, g 44 We worship God only; but as to other things we joyfully obey you," viz. emperors. And Theophilus Antiochenus ; h 44 The divine law doth not only forbid us to worship idols, but the elements also, sun, moon, and the other stars. So that we must not worship heaven, nor earth, nor the sea, nor fountains, nor rivers; but we ought to worship the true God only, and Maker of all things, in simplicity of heart, and sincerity of mind." And therefore saith Tatianus also, 1 44 I will never worship the workmanship that was made for our sakes." And presently, J 44 I will never be persuaded myself, nor per¬ suade another, to worship the substance of the elements." £ "Odev Seov pev povov n poanwov- pev, vplv be npos ra aXXa x a ' L P° vres v 7 rr)peTovfjiev. Justin, apol. [I. 17.] h 'O pev ovv 6eios vopos ov povov ncoXevei to rots elbcoXoLS TvpocrKvveiv, dXXci Kcu tols (rroi^elois, r)Xt(p, creXrjvr], tj rots Xonrols aarpOLs’ dXX’ ovre rw ovpavco, ovre yrj, ovre daXacrcrf], rj Trqyais, rj norapols Sp-qaKeveiv, aXX’ rj povar rc5 ovrcos @e

. Tatian. ad Grsec. [7.] j 2e/3«i/ rcoit o’rot^etGW rr/v vi ro- aracnv ovk av neLaOetriv, ovt av Treicraipi rov nX-qatov. Ibid. [36.] E e 418 Of Purgatory. Art, Origen also saith plainly, k “ If we may speak briefly, and all at once, it is the fault of impiety, or it is very wickedness* to worship any one whomsoever, besides Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. 1 ’ And so Theodoret: 1 “ Of men,” saith he, “ such as excel in virtue we honour as the best of men; but we worship only the God of all, the Father, and his Son, and the All-holy Ghost.” And so Lactantius saith, m “ There is no religion or veneration to be had of any but of the one God.” I might produce many more, but these witnesses may be enough to prove that it is God only that ought to be worshipped, and no creature whatsoever; and if no creature, much less ought the relics of creatures to be worshipped, as n Gregory Nazianzen saith : An impure sacrifice is sin, much more The relics of a dead man to adore. It is a sin to worship the best of creatures instead of God: and shall it be thought no sin to worship the relics of creatures instead of him ? Certainly if there be any doctrines in the world repugnant to the word of God, this and the former are to be reckoned as the principal of them all; whereby not only creatures, but the very images and relics of creatures, are held to have the worship of the true God due unto them. And so we pass from these to the last of the Romish doctrines here spoken of, and that is Concerning the invocation o f saints. And to know what the Romish doctrine concerning the invocation of saints is, we need go no further than the council of Trent; who there teach plainly, and command all their k Ut breviter et omni in unum collecta definitione dicamus, adorare alium quempiam preeter Patrem et Filium et Spiritum Sanctum, im- pietatis est crimen. Origen. in Rom. 1. i. [16. vol. IV.] 1 Hwv 8e avBpco tvcov tovs iv dperrj 8iTrovs dpicrrovs yepa.lpop.ev' povov 8e tow o\o>v Tvpocr- Kvvovpev 6eov, koi narepa, kcu tov eKeivov ye \6yov, kcu to navdyiov Tcvevpa. Theodor, therap. 2. [p. £03. vol. IV.] m Religio et veneratio nulla nisi unius Dei tenenda est. Lactant. de falsa relig. [vol. I. p. 88.] n c, T/3pis avayvou 46ura TvapecTT6.jj.euai QveeaOai, Aeiuortpou uenvwu \ei\paua tv aura crefieiu. Greg. Nazian. in dist. [vol. II. p. 146.] XXII. Of Purgatory. 419 bishops to teach, ° u That the saints reigning with Christ do offer up their prayers for men ; that it is good and useful to invocate or pray unto them, and for the obtaining benefits from God by his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who is our only Mediator and Saviour, to fly to their prayers, help, and assist¬ ance. But such as deny that those that enjoy eternal happi¬ ness in heaven are to be called upon, or that assert either that they do not pray for men, or that to call upon them to pray for every one of us is idolatry, or to be repugnant to the word of God, and to derogate from the honour of the one Mediator between God and man, the man Jesus Christ, or that it is.a foolish thing to pray to such as reign in heaven with our voice or minds, do think impiouslyNow though we do not here say, that this their doctrine concerning the saints praying for us is so ; yet we say, that this their doc¬ trine concerning our praying to the saints is a fond thing, and repugnant to the scriptures. And certainly it is so; for what else means that place of scripture, How then shall they call on him in idiom they have not believed? Rom. x. 14. That none is to be believed in but God, though others may be believed besides God, I suppose they will not deny ; or if they do, I would wish them to cast their eye a little upon the margin, and P there they will see ° Sanctos una cum Christo reg- nantes orationes suas pro hominibus offerre, bonum atque utile esse eos invocare, et ob beneficia impetranda a Deo per Filium ejus Jesum Chris¬ tum, Dominum nostrum, qui solus noster redemptor et salvator est, ad eorum orationes, opem, auxiliumque confugere; illos vero, qui negant Eeterna fselicitate in coelo fruentes invocandos esse, aut qui asserunt vel illos pro hominibus non orare, vel eorum ut pro nobis etiam sin¬ gulis orent invocationem esse idolo- latriam, vel pugnare cum verbo Dei, adversarique honori unius mediatoris Dei et hominum Jesu Christi, vel stultum esse in coelo regnantibus voce vel mente supplicare, impie sentire. Concil. Trident, sess. 25. [vol. X. p. 168.] P Ov tcivtov eari els r't /cat 7 rep\ avrov mvreveiv. to pev yap ecrri SeoTT]TOS, to 8e Tvavrbs irpay- paTos. Greg. Nazianz. orat 37. [vol. I. p. 596.] Sciendum est, quod ecclesiam credere non tamen in ec- clesiam credere debeamus, quia ec- clesia non est Deus, sed domus Dei est. Serm. de tempore [242. Aug. vol. V. App.] Hoc est enim credere in Deum quod utique plus est quam credere Deo, nam et homini cuilibet plerumque credendum est, quamvis in eum non sit credendum. Aug. in Psal. 77. [8. vol. IV.] Rursus etiam de apostolis ipsius possumus dicere, Credimus Paulo, sed non credimus in Paulum, Credimus Petro, sed non credimus in Petrum. Id. in Joh. tract. 29. [6. vol. III. par. ii.] Hac igitur prsepositionis syllaba (in) creator a creaturis secernitur, et divina separantur ab humanis. Ruf- e G 420 Of Purgatory. Art. several of the Fathers making this distinction betwixt believ¬ ing in a person, and believing of a person, that the first is proper and peculiar to God only, the other common also unto men. So that I may believe a man, but I am to believe in none but God. And if so, then from this place it clearly follows, that seeing the saints in heaven are not to be be¬ lieved in, they are not to be called upon ; but that we are to call upon none but God, because we are to believe in none but God. And hence it is, that when the disciples came to our Saviour to direct and instruct them how to pray, he bad them say daily, Our Father which art in heaven, Matt. vi. 9. Luke xi. 2: wherein he directs them not only what they should pray for, but whom to pray to ; not to this, or that, or the other saint, but to God, Our Father which art in heaven. But I need not insist any longer upon this, having proved before that it is God that is the only person in the world that ought to be religiously worshipped : for from thence it plainly follows, that God is only to be prayed to : for invocation is the principal part of religious worship, insomuch that it is sometimes put for the whole: as when the place of God’s worship is called a house of prayer, Isa. lvi. 7; viz. because it is prayer that is the chief worship that is performed in it. And therefore <3 Origen saith, “ That to call upon the name of fin. in expos, symbol, [p. 26.] Cre¬ dere et Petro et Paulo jure debemus, in Petrum vero et Paulum credere, id est in servos conferre honorem domini non debemus. Credere illi quilibet potest homini. Credere vero in ilium soli te debere noveris majes- tati. Euseb. Emisen. de symb. horn. 2. [Max. Bibl. patr. vol. VI. p. 630.] q Et si invocare Domini nomen et adorare Deum unum atque idem est, sicut invocatur Christus et ado- randus est Christus. Origen. in Rom. 1 . 8. [5. vol. IV. p. 624.] And therefore doth St. Chrysostome join prayer and divine worship together, as, IloXXoi paXXov evxV Kat Xarpeia Qeov o-rjpeiov ec ttl diKaLocrvvrjs and- (rrjs. Chrysost. de oratione, liom. I. [vol. VI. p. 756.] T va Tvdvra tov X povov reus 7 Tpocrevxctis Kai rfj tov fleov XaTpeia Kai peXerr) av^copev. Ibid. [p. 754 .] "iva rovs pev eloodoTas £t}v iv TTpo&evxcds Kai XaTpeia tov Qeov. Ibid. horn. 2. [init.] And therefore he sometimes puts one for another, yea, XaTpeia for tt pocrevx*1> as, Anbrep xPV Ka ' L T V S kXwtjs cnravicr- rapevovs (pdaveiv del tov rjXiov Tjj tov Qeov XaTpeia, Kai TpaTretjjs cnrTope- vovs, Kai KaOevdeiv peXXovras. Ibid, horn. 1. [p. 757.] And what he there means by XaTpeia he expresseth in the following words, MaAXov de Kai Kad ’ eKdorTrjv copav piav evxh v Se g 3 7rpoo-(fiepovTas, iaov rfj rjpepa dpopov rpexovTas. Ibid. And there¬ fore he adds, ’Ey de ye tj] tov x ei pd>- vos ciipa Kai Tr)s vvktos to nXeicrTov pepos els Trpoaevxds avahicrKovTas, Kai ra yovara KapuTovras crvv ttoXXm tc 5 <^>o/3a> Ttj derjcrei TvpoaexovTas , paKa- pl^ovTas eavTovs eni Trj tov Qeov Xarpeia. Ibid. XXII. Of Purgatory. 421 the Lord or to worship him, is one and the same thing.” So that he alone may be worshipped that is to be called upon ; and he alone may be called upon who may be wor¬ shipped. And so he that may not be worshipped ought not to be called upon ; and therefore seeing it is not lawful to wor¬ ship the saints, it cannot be lawful to call upon them. And whatsoever our adversaries may boast, yet certainly the Fathers did not hold that the saints departed should be prayed to, as appears from the descriptions which they give of prayer. St. Basil saith, r 44 Prayer is the desire of something that is good, made by holy persons to God;” not to the saints, but to God immediately. And so Damascen saith, 5 u Prayer is the ascension of the mind to God, or the desire of convenient things from God.” And therefore saith St. Chrysostome, t “ Every one that prays discourseth with God.” u a When thou readest,” saith Gilbertus, “ thou art taught by Christ, but when thou prayest thou talkest familiarly with him.” So that it seems they did not think we should go to any of the courtiers of heaven to speak to the King for us, but that we should speak to him ourselves. Nay, and Origen saith expressly, v “ For we must pray only to the most high God, and we must pray to his only begotten and the firstborn of every creature, even the Word of God, and beseech him as our High Priest to present our prayer, that comes to him, to his God and our God, to his Father and the Father of all those that live according to the word of God.” And elsewhere : x “ Every prayer, and supplication, r Upoaevxn earriv airqcns dyaOov rvapa rcov evcreftcov els Oeov yivopevrj. Basil, hom. in mart. Julit. [vol. I. P-3 l8 -l s Ilpocrevx'r] ecrriv dvafiacris vov 7 Tpos 6e6v, T) aiTTjO’lS TWV npOCTYJKOVTCOV irapa Oeov. Damasc. de orthod. fid. 1. 3. c. 24. t nay npocrevxdpevos r v KTiapdrcov. Athanas. contra Arian. orat. [III. I2 -] r/ b On ov del Xpicmapovs ey/cara- XeLTreip rr\v enxXrjcrLav tou deov, v 'irjarov Xpicrrov, OTL tpis ecrrcu eV't TOV ovoparos rrjs e7naK07rrjs’ Si a Tavrrjv ovv ttjv alriav npoyvaxnv el\r)(f)OT€s reXelav kclt- ((TTrjaav tovs npoeiprjpevovs, Kai p.e- rat~v imvop.r)V (io\ anovoprjv ) SeSco- KaaLV, 07 T(os iav KOLp-rjOwaiv, Sia- detjcovTai erepot. SedoKipaapevoi avftpes ti)v XfLTovpyiav avrcov. Clement, epist. ad Corinth, p. 57. 426 Of Ministering in Art. to himself hut he that is called of God , as was Aaron , Heb. v. 4. And therefore God complains of such prophets as run before they be sent, and preach his word to others before they have received power from him : I have not sent these prophets , saith he, and yet they ran: I have not spoken unto them , yet they have prophesied. Jer. xxiii. 21. And therefore he commands his people, saying, Hearken not to the words of the prophets that speak unto you , xxvii. 14, for I sent them not , ver. 15. So that such as God doth not send, man is not bound to hear. Did I say, man is not bound to hear? Nay, man is bound not to hear. And if man is bound not to hear those whom God hath not sent, certainly those that he doth not send are bound not to preach. And he that further considers the several titles that are given to the ministers of God in the holy scripture, may have good ground to subscribe to this truth: for they are called stewards , Tit. i. 7. Now it doth not belong to every man that will to be a steward, unless he be appointed by him whose steward he is to be, Luke xii. 42. Again, they are called aynbassadors , 2 Cor. v. 20. And who dare undertake an em¬ bassage to a foreign prince or people without a commission from his own king? Yea, the very words used by the Holy Ghost to express them by, do all imply office; as, bishops, ministers, deacons. Now there is no office that lies open in common to all, but a man must be particularly appointed and commissionated by him that hath power to do it, before he can be put into it, or invested with it. And hence it is also, that we find in scripture several rules laid down for the choosing of men into this office, 1 Tim. iii. 2, 3, 4. iv. 14. Tit. i. 5. 9. Whereas, if any one might take upon him this office, these rules and directions would be altogether super¬ fluous. To all which we might also consider, what confusion and disorder the church would fall into, should any one, that thought himself a man gifted for it, undertake this sacred office? And truly of this we have had too many years of sad and woful experience, when ministers turned laymen, and laymen turned ministers, till at length we were likely to have all ministers and no laymen, or rather all laymen and no ministers: and the only way to keep us from returning to XXIII. 427 the Congregation. that disorder is by adhering to this truth, b that every man should look to his own business, and follow his own calling; he that is called to the clergy, to preach like one that is called to the clergy; and he that is one of the laity, to hear like one of the laity; every man keeping within the bounds which the great God hath placed him in, not undertaking the office of the ministry, unless he be lawfully called unto it. The Fathers do offer themselves also to be witnesses in this case, but I shall trouble but these few for the present. As for the sacraments, St. Basil saith, c “ But they being far from us, (and laymen,) have no power to baptize or ordain/'’ d “ For that,” saith Athanasius, “ is the office only of those that are over the catholic church: for it belongs to you, and to you only, and to none else, to give to drink of the blood of Christ.” St. Chrysostome joins both sacraments together: e “ But,” saith he, “ if none can enter into the kingdom of heaven unless he be born again of water and the Spirit, and he that eateth not the flesh of the Lord and drinketh his blood is cast out of eternal life, but all these things cannot be performed by any one else, but only by those holy hands, I mean the priest’s, how can any one without them either shun the fire of hell, or be made par¬ taker of the crowns that are set before us V So that it is the priests or ministers only, and none else, that can ad¬ minister either of the sacraments. And therefore f Atha- b T <5 yap dp^iepel I8iai XeiTOvp- yiai 8e8opevai elcrl, Kai tols lepevcnv 1810s 6 ronos 7rpocrT€TaKTac, xal Xevi- rais I8lai 8caxoviai enlxecvTat’ 6 Xaixos avOpconos rots Xa'ixols npocr- raypacnv heberai’ exacTTOS vpcov, ddeXcpol, ev r <5 18 too ray pan ev^a- picrre'cTco deq>, ev ayadr) crvveiftrjcreL vnap)(a>v, prj napexfialvcov tov copc- crpevov rrjs XeiTOvpylas avTOV xavdva ev aepvoTrjn. Clem. Rom. epist. ad Corinth, p. 53. c 0 1 8e dnoppayevres yevopevoi, ovre tov f 3 anrl£eiv, ovre tov x €l P°~ rovelv el^ov et-ovcrlav. Basil, epist. ad Amphil. [III. p. 21.] d Touro povov ecrn tcov tt]s xado- Xixrjs exxXrjalas npoecrrcoTcov' povov yap vpcov ecrn nponlvetv to aipa tov XpLCTTOv, tcov 8e aXXcov ov8evos. Athanas. apol. [contra Arianos, 11. vol.Lp.133J e Et yap ov 8vvaTal tis eloreXSelv els Trjv ftacnXelav too v ovpavcov, eav pr) 81 v8aros xal nvevparos dvayev - vrjdrj, xal 6 prj Tpcoycov ttjv adpxa tov xvpiov, xal to alpa avTOv nlvcov, e’xfiefiXyjTaL Ttjs alcovlov orjs, ndvm 8e TavTa 8 l eTepov pev ov8evos, povov 8e 81a tcov dylcov exeivcov encTeXeirai Xeipcov, tcov tov lepeos Xeyco, ncos dv tls tovtcov exTos rj to ttjs yeevvrjs ex(fovyelv 8 vvr)creTaL nvp, y) tcov dino- xeipevcov crrecpavcov TV%elv. Chrysost. nepl iepcocTvvrjs, Xoy. y. [vol. VI. p. 16. ] f Kai TavTa pev oi>x otl xdv (Txicrpanxcov noTrjpiov xexXacrTai 428 Of Ministering in the Congregation. Art. XXIII. nasius pleads it was no sacramental cup that Ischyras con¬ secrated, he being not lawfully ordained; and S Socrates, that this Ischyras committed a crime worthy of many deaths, in presuming to do the work of a minister, not being ordained. And as for preaching the word, Cyril of Alexandria saith, h “ God distributeth the use of the trumpets in preaching of the word only to such as are consecrated.” But to this we have above two hundred Fathers met together in the Trullan council subscribing: for they there determined, 1 “ That it is not lawful for a layman to dispute or to teach publicly, taking there to himself the power or dignity of preaching, but to remain in the order which the Lord hath set him in, and to open his ear to such as have received the grace of teaching, and to learn divine things from them. For in one church God hath made divers or different members, according to the words of the apostle, &c. But if any one shall be taken weakening or transgressing this canon , let him be separated forty days .” Many more of the like testimonies from the ancients I might produce, but those are enough from whence to con¬ clude, that it is not laicful for any man to take upon him the office of the ministry , unless he be la icfully called thereunto. napa Ma.Ka.pLOV, dXX’ oti prjbev rj v oXoos eKei' 7ra)s yap ; onov ub T€ tokos K vpiaKrjs, nb Te Tls i«Xrj- alas, aXXa ph Te ° KaLpos pva-Tijpicov rjv" ovtos be eanv 6 7roXvdpvXXr]TOs ’icr xvpas, 6 UV T€ otto rrjs eKKXrjCTLas X(ipoTOVT]de\$, Kai ore tovs vnb MeXi- tiou KaraaraOevTas npea^VTepovs ’ AXet-avbpos eSe^ero. Athanas. apol. [Ibid. p. 134.] 8 ’Ev be T

7rore yap iepoavvqs tv\u>v to tov 7rpea(3vTepov ovopa eavTco nepidepevos ra iepecos npaTTeiv eroXpijcre. Socrat. hist, eccles. 1.1. c. [27.] h 'Emrrjpei be on povois ajrovepei rols lepaaQai Xaxovcn to KexprjcrOai reus crdX 7 ny^Lv. Cyril. Alex, de ado- ratione in spir. et verit. [1. v. vol. I. p. 168.] * "On ov bel b-qpoorla Xa'i bi~ dacrKaXiKov evrevdev nepLnoiovpevov, dXX’ e’lKeiv Trj napaboOeicrr) napa tov K vpiov Tai-ei, Kal to ovs to?s ttjv ^d- piv tov bcbaaKaAiKov Xa(3ovcn Xoyov biavoiyeiv, Ka\ Ta 6eia nap ovtcov eKbibaa-KeadaL. *Ev yap ttj pia ck- KXrjo'La bux(f)opa peXr) neTroLrjKev 6 Qeos Kara ttjv tov anocrToXov (podvrjv, &c. Ei be tls dXa> tov napovTa napacra- Xevcov Kavova, enl f]n*P as Tecro-apd-> kovto d(f)opi£e(r@(d. Concil. Trul. can. 64. [Hard. Cone. vol. III. p. 1685.] ARTICLE XXIV. OF SPEAKING IN THE CONGREGATION IN SUCH A TONGUE AS THE PEOPLE UNDERSTANDETH. It is a thing 'plainly repugnant to the word of God 9 and the custom of the primitive church , to have public prayer in the church , and to administer the sacra¬ ments in a tongue not understood of the people. I T was determined in the council of Trent, that a “ Though the mass” (so they call both their public prayers, and the sacrament of the Lord’s supper too, called often by the b ancients the eucharist) “ contains a great instruction of the faithful people, yet it doth not seem expedient to the Fathers that it should be every where celebrated in the vulgar tongue.” And as if they had not said enough there, they add presently, c “ If any one say that the rite or custom of the church of Rome, whereby part of the canon and words of the consecra¬ tion are uttered with a low voice, is to be condemned; or c - [94- P- 55-] dr) TOVTO Ka\ TCI (frpLKcodrj pvcTTr)pia, kcu TroXXrjs yc~ p.ovra rrj? crcorrjpLas ra kclB ’ eKacrrqv rcXovpcva (Xeyco) avva£iv, cv^apLcrTia KaXeLTUl, on noXXorv ccttlv cvcpycrr)- pcircov avdpvrjcns. Chrysost. in Mat. hom. [25. vol. II. p. 178. 35.] c Si quis dixerit ecclesiae Romanes ritum, quo summissa voce pars ca- nonis et verba consecrationis profe- runtur, damnandum esse, aut lingua tantum vulgari missam celebrari debere, aut aquam non miscendam vino in calice offerendo, eo quod sit contra Christi institutionem, ana¬ thema sit. Cone. Trident, sess. 22. can. 9. [Ibid. p. 129.] a Etsi missa magnam contineat populi fidelis eruditionem, non ta- men expedire visum est patribus, ut vulgari passim lingua celebraretur. Concil. Trident, sess. 22. cap.8. [vol. X. p. 128.] b 'H rpoepr) avTT) koX circa nap fjpiv cvxapuTTia. Justin. Mart. apol. [I. 66.] Nostra consonans est senten- tia eucharistiee, et eucharistia rursus confirmat sententiam nostram. Iren. 1 . 4. C. [18. 5.] 'O apros ica'i 6 oivos rrjs cvxaptcTTLas. Cyril. Hieros. ca- tech. [mystag.] t. [4.] ’E7ri rfj dvadci^cL tov dprov rrjs cvxapicrTias. Basil, de Spir. S. c. [27.] Cum tre- more et honore eucharistiam acci- piendam. Cyprian, ad Quirin. 1 . 3. 430 Of speaking in the Congregation Art. that mass ought to be celebrated in the vulgar tongue, or that water ought not to be mixed with the wine in the cup that is to be offered up, because it is contrary to Christ's institution ; let him be accursed." In which words they first transgress the ancient law of Justinian the emperor, that public prayers and offerings should be performed with a loud voice, so as to be heard of the people; and then they add sin unto sin, and command that they be not made in any tongue but an unknown tongue. First, they decree it should be so performed, that the people might not hear it; and then, that it should be so performed, that if they did hear it, they might not understand it. Now against this vain and sinful custom and practice of the church of Rome, our church doth here set down this article, that those public services should be administered in a lan¬ guage understood by the people; and that the contrary is repugnant to the word of God, and the practice of the primi¬ tive church. First, that it is repugnant to the word of God is plain; for that commands that all things be done to edifying , 1 Cor. xiv. 26 : and e what edifying can there be, when the people know not what is said ? Nay, the apostle, as if he foreknew what wild practices and opinions would arise in the church, spends almost a whole chapter in shewing that public duties should not be performed in an unknown tongue; For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue , speaketh not to men , but God; for no man understandeth him , 1 Cor. xiv. 2. For if I pray in an unknown tongue , my spirit prayeth , but my understanding is unfruitful , ver. 14. Else when thou slialt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving d Jubemus omnes episcopos et presbyteros non in secreto sed cum ea voce quae a fidelissimo populo exaudiatur divinam oblationem et precationem quae fit in sancto bapti- smate facere, ut inde audientium animi in majorem devotionem et Dei laudationem et benedictionem effe- rantur, &c. Idcirco igitur convenit ut ea precatio, quae in sancta obla- tione dicitur, et aliae orationes clara voce a sanctissimis episcopis et pre- sbyteris proferantur Domino nostro Jesu Christo Deo nostro cum Patre et Spiritu S. Justinian, novel. 137. [p. 225.] e Ex hac Pauli doctrina habetur, quod melius ad ecclesiae aedificatio- nem est, orationes publicas, quae audiente populo dicuntur, dici lin¬ gua communi clericis et populo, quam dici Latine. Cajet. in t Cor. xiv. [p. 158.] XXIV. 431 in a Tongue understood. of thanJcs , seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest ? ver. 16. I thank my God I speak with tongues more than ye all; yet in the church I had rather speak fire words with my understanding , that by my voice I might teach others also , than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue , ver. 18, 19. Certainly our adver¬ saries are not of Paul's mind, who had rather speak ten thou¬ sand words in an unknown tongue, (as to the people,) than five words in a known. And again, If the church come together in one place , and all speak with tongues , and there come in those that are unlearned and unbelievers , will not they say that ye are mad ? ver. S3. Yes, certainly, any one that comes to the popish masses, and hears a sound, but understandeth not a word of what is said, will surely think them to be mad, mad people that go to pray to the eternal Cod, and yet know not what is said. And this doth not only make for public prayers, but for all public ser¬ vices whatsoever; and the sacraments amongst the rest, which our Saviour, and his apostles after him, administered in a known tongue. But we have a generation now sprung up that think themselves wiser than their Maker and Redeemer, and know better what language his sacraments are to be administered in than himself did. But I wish they would at the length consider, whether all such services as are performed in an unknown tongue are not blind performances. The apostle said, I will pray with my spirit , and I will pray with my understanding also , 1 Cor. xiv. 15. And Cod's service should be a reasonable service , Rom. xii. 1. And therefore there is no f language scarce in the world but the scriptures are translated into it, that so all that profess the Christian religion, be they of what language they will, may know the mind and will of Cod, and understand the duties he requireth of them; and so perform a reasonable service to him. But, if there be no necessity of understand¬ ing what the priests say or do in their public services, surely * Kat rj 'E/3pcua>i/ (pcovrj, ov povov els TTjV c E\\r]v(ov /J.eTe[3\T]dr), aXXci kcil els tt)v toov ‘PcopatW, kcu Alyv- 7 ttlcov, s npoecpT 7- h Quod impulerit Dalmatas alios- pev, Tvavcrapcvcov rjpwv rrjs eixv s "P“ que Illyricos, ut, abolita lingua La- tos 7rpo(T(f)ep6TaL, kcu oivos kcu v8cop, tina, vulgari in sacris mysteriis per¬ fect! 6 7rpoeaTa>s ex >xcis opoioos kcu ev- agendis uterentur. Avent. in annal. XCipicrTias ocn] dvvapes aired avanep- [p. 334'] 7ret , fcai 6 \aos C7revcf)r]pe7., \eymv to XX TV. in a tongue understood. 433 expressly commanded to say * with a loud voice \ and why so* but that the people might be sure to hear and understand them ? And thus Origen saith, k “ The Greeks pray to God in the Greek, the Romans in the Roman, and every one in his own tongue. 11 But this is so plain, “ that, 11 as Lyra saith, 1 “ in the primi¬ tive church, the blessings, and other common prayers were made in the vulgar tongue, 11 that the papists themselves, who are now the only persons that are against it, cannot but acknowledge it. For Aquinas himself saith, m “In the pri¬ mitive church it was a madness for any one to say prayers in an unknown tongue, because then they were ignorant of the ecclesiastical rites, and knew not what was done there. 11 So Harding too: n u In the time of the primitive church, 11 says he, “ the people celebrated holy things in the vulgar tongue. 11 So that by their own confession, it is a thing repugnant to the custom of the primitive church to have public prayers or the sacraments administered in an unknown tongue. i As, ’EK(j)a>vcc>s 6 tepevs' on crov ccrnv rj ftacnXeia Kai 1) dvvapis. Chrys. liturg. [Bibl. vet. patr. vol. II. p. 82.] ‘O ftiaKOVOS €K(p(OV(OS’ iv clprjvrj tov Kvpiov derjda)pev. Ibid. [p. 65.] 'O iepevs kXIvci tt)v Ke(f)aXrjv, Kcii alpiov rqv 8 e£iav avrov pera evXa- fizias, cvXoyel tov dyiov ctprov , ix- (f)d>va>s Xeyoav, edaxe rots aylois avrov p.adrjra'is. Basil, liturg. 3. [Ibid. p. 51.3 Aeywv €K(f)dov(os, Xafiere, v Xol- tvwv erti^e, 8ia xP L °p € @ a > €7reLTa 8e ra 7rpoXe^deVra iv rrj ko - Xvpftrjdpa TeXicravres avpfioXa ra> pvp(p cr(f)payi£6pe6ct vo-repov. Quaest. et resp. ad orthod. ascript. Justino Mart, quaest. 137. [p. 501.] XXV. Of the Sacraments. 439 or instituted as a sacrament ? Because Christ ordained that bishops, priests, and deacons should be ordained, doth it therefore follow that he intended and instituted their ordina¬ tion as a sacrament ? And as for matrimony, I know their corrupt translation hath it, And this is a great sacrament , Eph. v. 32, instead of This is a great mystery or secret, °as the Syriac and Arabic read it; and shall their false translation of the scripture be a sufficient [ground] for Christ's insti¬ tution of a sacrament? And lastly, for extreme unction, which Bellarmine tells us P“is truly and properly a sacra¬ ment, wherein the organs of the senses, the eyes, nostrils, lips, hands, feet, and reins in those that are about to die, are anointed with exorcised oil;” what institution have we for this sacrament in the gospel? Yes, say they, the apostles anointed with oil many that were sick , and healed them , Mark vi. 13. It is very good; it seems the apostles' practice and example was the institution of a sacrament. By this rule, whatsoever the apostles did must be a sacrament; and so plucking of the ears of corn must be a sacrament too at length. But certainly if examples may be the ground of institution, anointing the eyes of the blind with clay and spittle must be much more a sacrament than the anointing of the sick with oil; for it was the apostles only that did this, but it was our Saviour himself that did that, John ix. 6. But the apostle saith, If any one he sick amongst you let him call for the elders of the church ; and let them pray over him , anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord , James v. 14. It is true; but what analogy is there betwixt this anointing of the apostle and the extreme unction of the papists ? This was to be applied to any that were sick, Is any one sick amongst you ? but theirs only to such as are past <1 all hope of recovery; the apostles' was to be done by several elders, the ° To fJLVO’Trjpiov tovto fxeya icrrlv. Syriac, ooi jl;j [:cn Hoc ar¬ canum magnum est. Arab. Hoc secretum magnum est; not. Hoc sacramentum magnum est. r Est vere et proprie sacramen¬ tum, &c. in quo organa sensuum, oculi, nares, labia, manus, pedes, et renes oleo exorcizato in morituris inunguntur. Bellarm. de sacram. ex¬ treme unctionis, c. i. v rrjv crapiea to v Ki'ptou, Kai to alpa avrov nlvcov, ei8vvov ttjv larpeiav, Kcii pvplcov aya8d>v Tvpo^evos y'ive tcu qpiv, kcu rrjs rod TTveyparos qpas tpTr'niKqai %cipcros, kcu ov8e copicrptvov Kaipov, pco rjXiKLa, kcu tv ptar], kcu tv avreo tco yrjpq. yevopevov riva, ravr-qv dtfjacrdcu ttjv d^eiponoiqTov ncpiToprjv, tv fj ovk ccttl ttovov vTToptivcu, dXX* apcipTn- pcLTcov (fiopTca aTTodecrdai, kcu tcov tv 7 ravTL xpovco TvKqppiKqpcLT(£>v rrjv ervy- Xtoprjcnv evptcrOcu. Chrysost. in Gen, hom. 40. [p. 328. 4. vol. I.] c KaOcnrcp yap to crcopa avrov raepev tv tt) yfj Kapnov rrjs oIkov- pevqs rrjv (rodTqpiav rjveyKcv, ovtoo Kal to qptrepov raefrev tv rw fianTicrpaTi Kaprrov fjveyKe Tqv 8iKaiocrvvqv, tov ayiaapov, ttjv vloOccriav, tcl pvpia ayaOci. Id. in Rom. hom. 11. [p. 79. 25. vol. III.] d MS. fruits, and a little below, bodies and bring for body and brought. XXVII. Of Baptism. 457 salvation of the world, so also our body being buried in bap¬ tism brought forth fruit, even righteousness, sanctification, adoption, and innumerable other good things. 1 ’ St. Augustine saith, e “ That renovation in baptism is made in a moment, by the forgiveness of sins; for there is not so much as one, be it never so small, that remains, but may be pardoned. 11 Yea, St. Gregory saith, f 44 He that saith sins are not quite forgiven in baptism, may as well say the Egyptians were not truly dead in the Red sea. 11 And St. Augustine again, s 44 That in the baptismal washing, not only the pardon of such sins as are committed, but of such as shall be afterwards committed, is granted to such as believe in Christ. 11 And presently, h 44 It is so, I say, to be taken, that by the same washing of regene¬ ration, and the word of sanctification, all the sins of regenerate men are cleansed and healed, not only the sins which are now pardoned in baptism already, but also those which afterwards by human ignorance or frailty shall be contracted. 11 And the council of Nice, 144 He that is baptized descends indeed ob¬ noxious to sins, and held with the corruption of slavery, but he ascends free from that slavery and sins, the son of God, heir, yea, co-heir with Christ, having put on Christ, as it is written, If ye be baptized into Christ , ye hare put on Christ T But because it is here said that baptism is the sign of regeneration, and the word regenerated is so much carped at in our order for the administration of baptism, I shall e Sicut in momento uno fit ilia in baptismo renovatio remissione om¬ nium peccatorum; neque enim vel unum quantulumcunque remanet quod non remittatur. Aug. de Trinit. 1 . 14. [23. vol. VIII.] f Qui dicit peccata in baptismate funditus non dimitti, dicat in mari rubro iEgyptios non veraciter mor- tuos. Greg, epist. 1 . [xi. ep. 45. vol. H] „ & Quod baptismali lavacro non solum patratorum, verum etiam pos- teriorum peccatorum venia Christi fidelibus impetretur. Aug. de nuptiis et concupis. ad Val. 1 .1. [38. vol. X.] h Sic inquam accipiendum est, ut eodem lavacro regenerationis et verbo sanctificationis omnia prorsus mala hominum regeneratorum mundentur atque sanentur, non solum peccata quae omnia nunc remittuntur in bap¬ tismo, sed etiam quae posterius hu- mana ignorantia vel infirmitate con- trahuntur. Ibid. 1 Descendit quidem is qui bapti- zatur peccatis obnoxius et servitutis corruptione detentus; ascendit au- tem ab ea servitute et peccatis liber, factus filius Dei, et haeres, gratia ipsius factus, cohaeres autem Christi, indutus ipsum Christum sicut scrip- turn est, Quicunque in Christum bap- tizati estis Christum induistis. Con- cil. Nic. de S. baptismo apud Gelas. Cyzicen. 1 . 3. c. 31. [p. 173-] 458 Of Baptism. Art, next shew how the primitive church did long ago not only hold the same assertion, but also use the same expression. So saith St. Chrysostome, k “ By water we are regenerated, by blood and flesh we are nourished.' 1 '' Athanasius, 1 “ He that is baptized puts off the old man, and is renewed, as being regenerated by the grace of the Spirit/' 1 m “ And so,” saith St. Basil, “ being baptized in the name of the Holy Ghost, we are regenerated/* 1 The second council at Milevi or Milenum, n “ Infants, who cannot commit any sin as yet of themselves, are therefore truly baptized into the remission of sins, that what they contracted by generation might be cleansed in them by regeneration/ 1 To name no more, Justin Martyr himself, long before any of these, said expressly; ° “ Afterwards they be brought by us to a place where there is water, and after the same manner of regeneration that we are regenerated by, are they also regenerated/ 1 And there¬ fore let such as carp at that word in our liturgy hereafter know, it is the primitive church itself, and the most ancient and renowned Fathers they carp at. But we must know withal, that though the ancient Fathers do give so much as we do to baptism, yet not so much as the papists do. For they say baptism itself doth all these things for us; whereas what the Fathers still averred was, that it is the grace and Spirit of God in baptism that doth them. For, saith St. Basil, P “ If there be any grace in the water, it is not from the nature of the water, but from the presence of the Spirit. 11 q “For remission of sins, 11 saith St. Cyprian, “ whether k A i vdaros fxev dvayevvcopievoi, 81 x.a\ crapKos Tpes ep^opevov, 7 vpos ttjv fjptTepav ocoTrjplav. Greg. Nys¬ sen. orat. de baptismo Christi, [vol. III. p. 369.] u Aqua sacramenti visibilis est, aqua Spiritus invisibilis; ista abluit corpus, et significat quod fit in ani- ma; per ilium Spiritum ipsa anima mundatur et saginatur. Aug. in epist. Job. tract. 6. [11. vol. III. par. ii.] 460 Of Baptism . Art. rnised. The covenant of works had a double sacrament an¬ nexed to it, the tree of life, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. And the covenant of grace, according to the various dispensations of it, it hath had various sacraments also annexed to it. Under the law, or the more imperfect expres¬ sures of the said covenant, the sacraments were circumcision and the passover; under the gospel, or the more perfect expressures of it, they be baptism and the Lord’s supper. Which several sacraments, though they do differ in several things, yet as in other things, so in this they agree, that both under the law and gospel still one of them is an initiating, and the other a confirming sacrament. And so these of the gospel do exactly answer those under the law, not only in being instituted by the same Lord, and representing the same grace, but also in entitling us to the actual enjoyment of covenant privileges, and then in confirming the same privileges to us. By circumcision then, and baptism now, are we made members of the church of God; and by the Lord’s supper now, as by the paschal lamb then, the benefits of church- membership are sealed and confirmed to us. And the evan¬ gelical thus coming into the place of the legal sacraments, the same persons that were to participate of the legal are to par¬ ticipate also of the evangelical. Now under the law it is plain, that not only proselytes, but the children of Jewish parents, even of eight days old, were to be circumcised; that is, by circumcision were to be w initiated into the church of God; and so God commanding children to be circumcised, or initiated into the church, the same com¬ mand may well be looked upon as reaching to baptism too; for it is by this we are initiated into the church now, as it was w That by circumcision children were initiated into the church, and brought as it were into the cove¬ nant, the Jews themselves acknow¬ ledge and observe, as we may note from what is said at the circumci¬ sion of a child. The father saith, innia iD’nn 1 ? npx nns 'sh win DmiN, i. e. “ Blessed be thou, O Lord our God, who hast sancti¬ fied us with thy precepts, and com¬ manded us to initiate him (this child) into the covenant of Abraham our father.” And then the people that stand by say, inD 23 n© nun nsnrrti min’? monari p amiD n’unn'n, “As thou hast ini¬ tiated or brought him into the cove¬ nant, so bring him to the law, to matrimony, and to good works.” V. Buxt. synag. Jud. c. [4. p. 99.] XXVII. Of Baptism. 461 by circumcision they were initiated then. So that whosoever doth not baptize his children x whilst children seems to me to transgress the command of God, in not initiating them into the church according to his precepts. For though circumcision be only mentioned, yet it was therefore mentioned because the initiating sacrament where¬ by children were invested with church-membership; and the same reason holds good still for baptism. And as where the reason of a law fails, the law itself is abrogated, so where the reason of a law remains, the law seems still to be in force, though some circumstances of it be changed. But I would not be thought to speak this as if I supposed there was no law commanding infant-baptism in the New Tes¬ tament, but only that for infant-circumcision in the Old; for questionless the words of our Saviour are a law, when he saith, Go ye and teach all nations , baptizing them in the name of the Father , of the Bon, and of the Holy Ghost , Matt, xxviii. 19. Where, though it be translated teach , yet the word in the original properly imports y disciple , and make x Contra anabaptistas leg. can. apost. 47. [Bever. synod, vol. I.] Carthag. 51, 52. [Ibid. p. 573 ] y To find out that this is the true purport and meaning of the word, the best way will be to compare the places where it occurs, as Matt. xiii. 52. A ia tov ronas ypapparevs padq- revdels els Tqv fiaarikelav reov ovpavwv, where the Syriac renders the word pa6rjrev6e\s\>y “dmeth- talmad,” qui discipulus factus est, qui discipulum se preebet, it being the passive of to make a disciple, from * the Hebrew word vn7n, a scholar, a disciple, 1 Par. xxv. 8 : and it doth not only signify a scholar or learner, but a follower and professor of such a doctrine or tenet, in which sense N'Tobn is oft used in the Targum, as Num. xxxii. 14, Onk. and likewise in the Tal¬ mud, Berach. [fol.] 43. 2. And in this sense doth our Saviour always call his disciples “ tal- mide,” and so the Syriac word “ talmed,” to disciple, comes from “ talmido,” as the Greek "pad^revoo from pa6q- rt]s, (whence we may also observe, that the very notation of the word doth properly denote, to disciple, and not, to teach,) and this is the sense and the only sense which the Syriac word bears wheresoever it comes, and that not only in the scripture, but other authors, as (Zj-AimX 01X o r kiXZZj, “ ethtalmad loh lasbarto,” Offic. Maron. p. 394, i. e. are become pro¬ fessors or disciples of the gospel. And thus also is it taken in the place before cited. Matt. xiii. 52. The Arabic also, not only following the same sense, but using the same word too, even “ yattal- mido,” is made a disciple: and so the Persic renders it by “ shakird,” a disciple. And indeed the scope of the place cannot admit of any other interpretation of the 462 Of Baptism. Art. disciples; as if he should have said, Go ye and disciple all nations, or bring them over to be my disciples, and baptize them. So that all that are disciples are here commanded to be baptized; nay, they are therefore commanded to be bap¬ tized because disciples. And seeing all disciples are to be baptized, infants, the children of believing parents, amongst the rest, must be baptized too; for that they are disciples is clear, from their being circumcised under the law : for that argued they were in covenant with God, otherwise they could not have had the seal of the covenant administered to them; and if they were in covenant with God, they must needs be disciples; to be a disciple, and to be in covenant with God, being one and the same thing. So that all that are in cove¬ nant with God are his disciples; and all that are his disciples are in covenant with him. And again, of children our Saviour saith, Of such is the kingdom of God , Mark x. 14. And there¬ fore they must needs be disciples, unless such as are not dis¬ ciples should be thought to belong unto the kingdom of God. But I need not insist any longer upon this, to prove little word there. Another place where it comes is Matt, xxvii. 57, os /cal avros e/JiadrjTtvcre tco ’I rjcrov, that is, as the Syriac hath it, 001 oj’ jocn »Ax\Z.Z.j, “ doph hu ethtalmad vawTejeshuah,” who also was himself a disciple of Jesus, or, because he also was discipled to Jesus. And so both the Arabic and Persic likewise ; which the Ethiopic explains ®®?rt l i.: “ wawatuhi tazamdo,” for he also followed the Lord Jesus as a dis¬ ciple. The third place where the word occurs is Acts xiv. 21, /cal padrjTevo-avTes lkcivovs, that is, as the Syriac renders it, ooai “ talmed vaw lesagiye,” and had made many disciples j and so the Arabic renders it too by “ watalmada,” and they discipled many, as the words both in the Syriac and Arabic imply; though they be translated in both very improperly, Et docuerunt multos, (where we may see what little use the Latin translations are of if we have not skill in the lan¬ guages themselves.) But the Ethi¬ opic not having one word to express the full meaning of the place by, it puts another to it '; for immediately after it saith ®, the Syriac “ talmed,” and the Arabic “talmada,” are used, always answering one another. Only the XXVII. Of Baptism . 463 children to be disciples, if their parents be. For so long as children they are looked upon as parts of their parents, and therefore what their parents are they must needs be : if their parents be heathens, the children are heathens; if their parents be Christians, the children are Christians too. And truly unless this be granted, the children of believing parents under the gospel will be brought into a worse condition than they were under the law; for under the law children were still acknowledged to be within the covenant, and therefore had always the seal of the covenant administered to them : and if the children of believing parents, I mean outward professors of faith, should be denied the same privilege now under the gospel, the gospel must be necessarily supposed to be more strait and narrow than the law itself. But seeing both law and gospel contain one and the same covenant, and seeing under the law children were accounted disciples, and therefore circumcised as well as adult proselytes, it must needs follow, that children are in the same capacity still as they were then; and seeing they were then admitted into the church by cir¬ cumcision, they are now to be invested with the same privilege by baptism. Syriac “ ethtalmad,” is used Luke i. 4, and “ methtalmad,” Acts xviii. 25, both answering to the Greek Kcmy^eopcii, which also doth not signify a bare teaching, but such a teaching as one learneth by, and becomes a pro¬ fessor of. And the word thus sig¬ nifying not to teach, but disciple, and make disciples, in all other places, it would be strange if it did not denote the same here too, viz., Matt, xxviii. 19. I am sure the Syriac (in which this commission for baptizing was first given to the disciples, our Saviour speaking that in Syriac which St. Matthew after¬ wards wrote in Greek) and Arabic translate it by the selfsame words here that they do in the other places, the Syriac by Oj.ia.XZ> “ talmed,” and the Arabic by ^3 XAj ? “ tal- midu,” make disciples; and it is observable that neither of them use the same word for didao-Kovres in the next verse, but the one Xj> “ alleph enun,” the other ? “ alimuhom,” teach them: only the Ethiopic renders both by but that is because they have no one word that signifies such a kind of teaching as fiaOrjTeva) doth, and therefore we may well understand here what the same translation adds to express the full meaning of the word by Acts xiv. 20, as the Persic also doth, “ Ite ac totum mundum docete ^ ^Uj qUA ^5 • • et ad fidem et religionem meam reducite.” And thus we see how all the ancient translations agree in the expounding of the word jtzadr/revo) in this as well as other places, not teach, but disciple: and therefore cannot but wonder how any one can brand that exposition with novelty. 464 Of Bapt ism. Art. Only we shall take notice of the doctrine and practice of the primitive church in this particular; and surely the nearer to the fountain head, the clearer the streams. Whether the apostles baptized children or no is nowhere expressly delivered in scripture; but howsoever it may be gathered from their successors : for certainly the apostles 1 successors durst never have done it unless they had seen the apostles themselves doing it before them. Now Origen saith, z “ Young children are baptized into the remission of sins. 11 And presently, a “ And because that by the sacrament of baptism the filth of our nativity is laid aside, therefore are little children baptized. 11 And elsewhere, b “ To this may that also be added, that it should be inquired into what is the cause, that seeing baptism is given to the church for the remission of sins, according to the observance or custom of the church, baptism is given also to little children; whereas if there was nothing in little children that ought to belong to pardon and forgiveness, the grace of baptism would be superfluous. 11 In St. Cyprian’s time there were some that thought indeed that children ought not to be baptized till the eighth day, according to the time appointed for circumcision; but none that held they ought not to be baptized at all whilst children. And to one that supposed they ought not to be baptized till the eighth day, St. Cyprian writes, saying, c “ But as to the cause of infants, which thou sayest before the second or third day after they are born ought not to be baptized, and that the 2 Parvuli baptizantur in remis- sionem peccatorum. Origen. in Luc. hom. 14. [p. 948. vol. III.] a Et quia per baptismi sacra- mentum nativitatis sordes deponun- tur baptizantur et parvuli. Ibid. b Addi his etiam illud potest ut requiratur, quid causae sit, cum bap- tisma ecclesiae in remissionem pec¬ catorum detur, secundum ecclesiae observantiam etiam parvulis baptis- mum dari, cum utique si nihil esset in parvulis quod ad remissionem de¬ beret et indulgentiam pertinere, gra¬ tia baptismi superflua videretur. Id. in Lev. hom. 8. [3. vol. II.] c Quantum vero ad causam in- fantium pertinet, quos dixisti intra secundum vel tertium diem quo nati sunt constitutos baptizari non opor- tere, et considerandam l'egem esse circumcisionis antiquae, ut intra oc- tavum diem eum qui natus est bap- tizandum et sanctificandum non pu- tares, longe aliud in concilio nostro omnibus visum est. In hoc enim quod tu putabas esse faciendum nemo consensit, sed universi potius judicavimus nulli hominum nato misericordiam Dei et gratiam dene- gandam. Cyprian, epist. 1 . 3. [ep. 64. init.] X X VIL Of Baptism . 465 law of the ancient circumcision is to be observed, that thou shouldst think that any one that is born ought not to be bap¬ tized or sanctified before the eighth day, it seemed far other¬ wise to all in our council; for in this which thou thoughtest should be done, none agreed; but rather all of us judged that the mercy and grace of God (in baptism) should be denied to no one born of men. 11 So that it seems a whole council then determined that children ought to be baptized. St. Augustine spends a whole chapter in proving, d 44 That by the price of the blood of Christ in baptism children are washed, freed, and saved from original sin propagated from the first parents. 11 And elsewhere he saith plainly, e 44 Seeing therefore children do not begin to be of the sheep of Christ but only by baptism, truly if they do not receive that, they will perish. 11 But to leave private persons, and to come to councils. The second council at Milevum determined, saying, f 44 It pleaseth also that whosoever shall deny that children newly come from their mothers 1 wombs should be baptized, let him be ac¬ cursed.” And the council at Gerundia, g 44 Concerning infants which are lately brought forth from their mother's womb, it pleaseth that it should be appointed, that if they be infirm, (as usually they are,) and do not desire their mother's milk, if they be offered, they may be baptized even the same day they are born. 1 ' Yea, and the sixth general council, called the Trullan, saith, h 44 We, following the canonical constitutions of the d Quod pretio sanguinis Christi in baptismo abluuntur parvuli, libe- rantur et salvantur a peccato origi- nali a primis propagato parentibus. Aug. contra Jul. Pelag. 1.3. c. 3. e Quoniam ergo de ovibus ejus non incipiunt esse parvuli nisi per baptismum, profecto si hoc non ac- cipiunt, peribunt. Id. de peccat. merit, et remis. 1 . 1. [40. vol. X.] f Item placuit ut quicunque par- vulos recentes ab uteris matrum bap- tizandos negat, &c. anathema sit. Concil. Milevit. 2. can. 2. [Concil. Hard. vol. I. p. 1217.] £ De parvulis qui nuper a ma- terno utero editi sunt, placuit con- stitui, ut si infirmi (ut assolet) fue* rint, et lac maternum non appetunt, etiam eadem die qua nati sunt, si oblati fuerint, baptizentur. Concil. Gerund, can. 5. [Concil. Hard, vol. II. p. 1044.] h Tois SavoviKols rwv narepoov 6es fianriadevra eivai Ae- yovrts, Kai ovde ravra did rrjv KeipaU Trep'i rrjs 7 TapadoOeia-qs avrols p-vara- yooyias dnoKplveadai emrrjdeiMS e'xov- (Tiv, TLV ° S irpocrKopparos ocpei- A (iv ravra fiaTvrl&o'Oai. Concil. Trill# can. 84. [vol. III. p. 1692.] h h BEVERIDGE# 466 Of Baptism. Art. XXVII. Fathers, determine also concerning infants, that as often as there shall not be found sufficient witnesses which will say that they were undoubtedly baptized, and themselves, by reason of their infancy, cannot aptly answer for the mysteries being delivered to them, without any scandal such ought to be bap¬ tized. 55 So that it is not only the opinion of private persons, or particular synods, but of a general council itself, that the baptism of infants ought in any ivise to be retained in the church . ARTICLE XXVIIL OF THE LORD’S SUPPER. The supper of the Lord is not only a sign of the love that Christians ought to have among themselves one to another , hut rather it is a sacrament of our redemption by Christ’s death : insomuch that to such as rightly , worthily , and with faith receive the same , the bread which we break is a partaking of the body of Christ; and likewise the cup of blessing is a partaking of the blood of Christ. O F the two sacraments which it hath pleased our Lord Christ to institute in his church, the first, viz., baptism, we have discoursed of in the foregoing article: the other pre¬ sents itself to be spoken to in this under the name of the supper of the Lord. Which name, though the papists are very angry at us for making use of it, yet we need not regard that, seeing the scripture giveth us sufficient warrant for it, St. Paul himself calling it the Lord's supper , 1 Cor. xi. 20. And therefore though the Fathers do often call it the eucha- rist, as we may see art. XXIV., yet do they frequently call it the Lord’s supper also, as we may see in the margin a . And a ’E£ oov naiftevopeOa, prjre to kol- 419. 23. vol. III.] Kal Tpdne^av vbv btiirvov iv eKKXr](TLa ecrOUiv kcii napadels aladr]Tr)v, 7rpos eKeivrjv ti]v 7TLVO.V, pr/re to KvpiaKov delnvov ev Tpdne^av tov vovv avaTeivov, 7rpos to oIklo. Kadvfipi^eiv. Basil, reg. bre- deinvov to KvpiaKov. Ibid. [p. 422. vior. interrog. 310. [vol. II.] "On 36.] Dominicam coenam vocat sa- to KvpiaKov ScIttvov, tovt€cttl to 8e- cramentuin Dominicum. Theodo- ctttotikov, 6 o'Lvov 8L8oTaL croi to aipa, Lva yivrj, ptTaXaficov crcopaTos Kal alpaTos Xpiarov, avcr- (Tcopos /cat c rvvaipos avTov. Cyril. Hier. catech. myst. 4. [1.] XXVIII. Of the Lord’s Supper. 469 that we are thereby made one body and blood with himself. Therefore saith St. Hilary, c “ Of the truth of the flesh and blood there is no place left to doubt; for now by the pro¬ fession of the Lord himself it is truly flesh and truly blood; and these being received and taken down, cause that we should be in Christ, and Christ in us.” And St. Chrysostome; d “ Wherefore it is necessary we should learn the miracle of these mysteries, what it is, and why it was given, and what profit there is of the thing. We are made one body, and members of his flesh, and of his bones. But let such as are initiated strive for the knowledge of these sayings : that therefore we may not only be made such by love and charity, but indeed mixed with that flesh. It is that nourishment that causeth it, which he hath vouchsafed us, willing to shew us the desire he hath towards us ; therefore he mixed himself with us, and tempered his body with ours, that we might become one, as a body joined to the head.” To which we may add that of St. Augustine; e “ But let us hear and understand two in one flesh, Christ and the church, as the mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus giving us his flesh to be eaten, and his blood to be drunk, we receive with a faithful heart and mouth.” Thus Origen saith, f “ When thou receivest the holy food, and that incorruptible banquet, c De veritate carnis et sanguinis non est relictus ambigendi locus : nunc enim et ipsius Domini pro¬ fession, et fide nostra vere caro est et vere sanguis est; et haec accepta atque hausta id efficiunt, ut et nos in Christo et Christus in nobis sit. Hilar, de Trin. 1 . 8. [14.] d A 16 Kal avciyKaiov paOelp to Oavpa TCOP fXV(TTT]plo)V TL 7TOT6 i(TTl, Kal 8La tl edoOrj, Kal tls rj cocfieXeia tov it pay- paros’ ep cra>p.d eapep, Kal peXrj ttjs aapKos avrov, Kal eK tu>p ocrrecop avrov’ ol 8e pepvrjpepoi TrapaKoXov- SeiTaxrap tols Xeyopepois’ iv ovv prj popop Kara Trjpdyanrjp tovto yepcopeda, aXXa Kal Kar avro to npdypa els CKelvrjv avaKepacrflcopev ttjv aapKa' did Ttjs Tpo(f)r}s tovto yiv^TOi i^apuraro, ftovXopevos t)piv del^ai top noOop op *X eL rjpas’ 8ia tovto dpepi{;tp (avrop rfplp, Kal ape(pvp€ to acopa avTov els rjpas, ipa ep tI yepc'opeda, KaOdnep crcopa Ke(f)aXrj avprjppepop. Chrysost. in Joh. Xoy. ps. tom. 2. p. 746. [26.] e Nos autem audiamus et intelli- gamus duos in carne una, Christum et ecclesiam, sicut Mediatorem Dei et hominum, hominem Christum Jesum, carnem suam nobis man- ducandam, bibendumque sanguinem dantem fideli corde atque ore susci- pimus. Aug. contra advers. leg. et proph. 1 . 2. [33. vol. VIII.] f Quando sanctum cibum illudque incorruptum accipis epulum, quando vitae pane et poculofrueris,manducas et bibis corpus et sanguinem Domini, tunc Dominus sub tectum tuum in- greditur. Origen. in diversa evangel, loca, horn. 5. [p. 285. part. ii. opp. fol. Par. 1604.] 0 470 Art. Of the Lord’s Supper. when thou enjoyest the bread and water of life, and eatest and drinkest the body and blood of the Lord, then doth the Lord come under thy roof.” And Tertullian ; s “ The flesh is shadowed by imposition of hands, that the soul may be illuminated by the spirit. The flesh is fed with the body and blood of Christ, that the soul may be fattened by God.” And Macarius; h “ In the church is offered bread and wine, the antitype of his flesh and blood ; and they that partake of the visible bread spiritually eat the flesh of the Lord.” All which could not be, unless we were partakers of the body and blood of Christ in the sacrament. Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of bread and wine in the sacrament of the Lord) cannot be proved by holy writ; but is repugnant to the plain words of scripture , overtliroweth the nature of a sacrament , and hath given occasion to many superstitions. Scripture and Fathers holding forth so clearly, that whoso¬ ever worthily receives the sacrament of the Lord's supper do[th] certainly partake of the body and blood of Christ, the devil thence took occasion to draw men into an opinion, that the bread which is used in that sacrament is the very body that was crucified upon the cross; and the wine, after consecration the very blood that gushed out of his pierced side. The time when this opinion was first broached was in the days of Gregory the Third, pope of Rome. The persons that were the principal abettors of it were Damascen' in the eastern. g Caro inarms impositione adum¬ bratin’, ut et amma spiritu iliumine- tur. Caro corpore et sanguine Christi vescitur, ut et anima de Deo saginetur. Tertul. de resurrect, carnis, c. 8. [vol. III.] 11 ’Ev rfj €kk\t)(tici TrpocrcpepcTai apTos K(ii oivos, avTiTvnov rrjs crdpKos > \ <7 \ C aVTOV KCLL TOV CUfJLGTOS, KCLL OL /L6Ta- \ap[3dvOVT€S €K TOV (ftcuvopevov apTOV, nvevpaTiKoos tt]v crctpKa tov K vplov icrOlovcri. Macar. iRgypt. bom. 27. * O UK. €CTTL TV7TOS 6 CtpTOS KCU 6 OLVOS TOV C TCOpaTOS KCU CUpClTOS TOV XpiCTTOV’ pi) y evoiTo’ dAX’ avro to crcopa tov Kvpiov Ttdecopevov civtov tov K vpiov cIttovtos, tovto pov eari, ov tvttos tov crcopciTos, dXXd to crcopa , Kal ov tvttos tov aiparos, dXXd to aipa. Damascen. orthod. fid. 1. 4. c. 14. [p. 317.] XXVIII. Of the Lord's Supper. 471 and afterwards Amalarius k in the western churches. It was no sooner started in the east, but it was opposed by a famous council at Constantinople, consisting of three hundred and thirty-eight bishops, the famous opposers of idol-worship. But afterwards in the second council of Nice it was again defended, and in particular by Epiphanius the deacon, who confidently affirmed, that 1 “ after the consecration, the bread and wine are called, are, and believed to be properly the body and blood of Christ.In the western also, Amalarius having broached this opinion, Paschasius Radbertus glibly swallowed it down. But Rabanus Maurus, Ratramnus or Bertramnus, (of whom rjiore presently,) as also Johannes Scotus Erigena, not only stuck at it, but refused it, and wrote against it as a poisonous error. And after them Berengarius too, who was not only written against by Lanfranc, archbishop of Canterbury, but condemned for it in a council held at m Vercel, (where the book of Johannes Scotus of the eucharist was also con¬ demned,) and at another council held at Rome about the same time. And though he did recant his opinions at a council held at Tours, and another at Rome, n as some think, so as never to hold it more, °yet his followers would never recant what they had learned from him. But in the Lateran council, held an. 1215, the opinion of the real or carnal presence of Christ was not only confirmed, but the word k Hie credimus naturam simplicem panis et vini mixti verti in naturam rationabilem, scilicet corporis et sanguinis Christi. Amalar. de eccles. offic. 1. [hi.] c. 24. 1 Mera fie top ayiaapop cr(op,a Kvpicos Kai al/xa Xpiv pvo-TTjpioov 7 rapa- doaei. acopa tov ctprov eKaXeae, Kal aipa to Kpapa. Theodoret. dialog. I. [p. 17. VOl. IV.] Ta opwpeva crup- fioXa Tp tov cru>paTOS koX aiparos npo(rr)yopia TeTiprjKev. Ibid. [p. 1 8.] Sic Deus in evangelio quoque vestro revelavit panem corpus suum appel- lans. Tertul. adv. Marcion. 1 . 3. c. 19. [vol. I.] Utique in corpus ejus lignum missum est; sic enim Chri- stus revelavit, panem corpus suum appellans cujus retro corpus in pane prophetes figuravit. Id. adv. Ju- daeos, [c. 10. vol. II.] Quando Do- minus corpus suum panem vocat, de multorum granorum adunatione congestum, populum nostrum quern portabat indicat adunatum; et quan¬ do sanguinem suum vinum appellat de botris atque acinis plurimis ex- pressum atque in unum coactum, gregem item nostrum significat com- mixtione adunatae multitudinis co- pulatum. Cyprian, epist. [69. p. 182.] Nos autem audiamus panem quern fregit Dominus deditque discipulis suis esse corpus Domini salvatoris. Hieron. ad Hedibiam, [ep. cxx. 2. vol. I.] Sed et suis discipulis dans XXVIII. Of the Lord's Supper. 477 This bread is my body; this bread, that I have taken and blessed and give to you, is my body. Now, as Bellarminey himself acknowledgeth, this proposition, This is my body , can¬ not possibly be taken any other ways than significatively, so as that the sense should be, This bread signifies my body, is a sign or sacrament of it, it being absolutely impossible that bread should be the very body of Christ: for if it be bread and yet the very body of Christ too, then bread and the body of Christ would be convertible terms. So that the very words of institution themselves are sufficient to convince any rational man, whose reason is not darkened by prejudice, that that of which our Saviour said, This is my body , was real bread, and so his body only in a figurative or sacramental sense; and by consequence, that the bread was not turned into his body, but his body was only represented by the bread. But if this will not do, we may consider in the second place the institution of the other part of the sacrament: for it is said, And he took the cup , and gave thanks , and gave it to them , saying , Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood of the new testament , which is shed for many for the remission of sins , Matt. xxvi. 27, 28. Where these last words, for this is my blood , &c., being the words of consecration; and our Saviour having given them the cup before, and bidden them to drink all of it, it could not pos¬ sibly be meant of any thing else than the wine in the cup, of which he said these words. To which we may also observe what follows, even after the words of consecration : But I say consilium primitias Deo offerre ex suis creaturis, non quasi indigenti, sed ut ipsi nec infructuosi nec in- grati sint, eum qui ex creatura panis est accepit et gratias egit dicens. Hoc est corpus meum; et calicem similiter qui est ex ea creatura quae est se¬ cundum nos suum sanguinem con- fessus est. Irenaeus adv. haeres. 1 . 4. C. [ 17 . 5*] Et7TO)I/ de TOVTO pov icrri to craypa, deiKvvei otl avTO to crcopa tov Kvplov iuTiv 6 apros 6 ayia£o- pcvos iv to) dvcriao-rrjpicp, kcu ov^l avTLTvnov. Theophyl. in Matt. 26. [p. 162.] And therefore in Dioscorus’s Ethiopic Liturgy, in the rehearsal of our Saviour’s words at the con¬ secration of the bread and wine, for tovto pov eVrt to aiopa, the priest saith expressly, Accipite, comedite, r Htt]- plov at paros Kara Oecrpovs rr/s Kaivrjs bLa 6 rjK.rjs 7 rap€iXr)(f) 6 T€s. Euseb. de- monst. evang. 1 . 1 . c. 10. p. 39 A. e Ovroos Ka\ to napa ra>u tucttoov Xapfiavopevov crcopa XpLtrrov koi rrjs aiadrjrrjs ovcrlas ovk. i^iararai, xa'i rf/s vorjrrjs ddLaiperov pevei ^ apiros . Ephraem. de sacris Antioch, legi- bus, [apud Photii Myriob. p. 793.] 1 O Of ye aa)TT]p o rjperepos evi] A- Aa£e ra ovopara, Kai rw pev cruipari to tov avpfioXov redeiKev ovopa, tm 8e to tov adopaTos. Theo¬ doret. dial. 1. [p. 17. vol. IV.] XXVIII. Of the Lord's Supper. 481 their names, and gave the name of the symbol to the body, and the name of the body to the symbol:” not the things,- but the names were changed. And therefore saith St. Augus¬ tine, s “ For the Lord did not stick to say, This is my body, when he gave the sign of his body.” And Acacius saith, h “ The bread and wine sanctifies them that feed upon this matter.” And Macarius of Egypt saith, 1 “ In the church is offered bread and wine, the antitype of his body and blood.” To these we may add that of Bertramus, otherwise called Ratramnus: “ k What else but the Substance of the wine is seen? It is clear, because the bread and wine are Christ’s body and blood figuratively.” And again: “ 1 There is nothing more absurd than to take bread for flesh, and to call wine blood: neither would it be a mystery, wherein there is nothing secret and hidden contained. And how shall that be called the very body and blood of Christ wherein there is no change known to be made? And if they have endured no change, they are nothing else than what they were before.” And again: m “ For as to the substance of the creatures, what they were before consecration, that they are also after.” And in the Comment upon St. Matthew, attributed to St. Chrysostom, we find it said, n “ If therefore it be so dangerous to transfer the sanctified vessels to private uses, in which not the true £ Non enim Dominus dubitavit dicere. Hoc est corpus meum, cum signum daret corporis sui. Aug. contra Adimant. c. 12. [3. vol. VIII.] h Panis vinumque ex hac materia vescentes sanctificat. Acac. in Gen. 2. [p. 41. Zephyri Catenae.] i ’Ey rfj eKKXrjcria 7rpocr- paTOs kcu mparos TvpocrrjyopLq Ter'iprj- KeVy ov ttjv (f)v i8 94 -] y D “ If sacraments have not a certain resem¬ blance of the things whereof they are sacraments, they are no sacraments at all.” Now wherein is there any resemblance betwixt the body of Christ and bread, but only in the eating \ Even because the one received by faith nourisheth and pre- serveth the spiritual, as the other received into the stomach doth the natural life. The bread itself hath no resemblance at all of his body, neither hath the bread as reserved, or car¬ ried about, or worshipped, any such resemblance; all the re¬ semblance it hath, is in its feeding the body as Christ doth the soul. k Christ is the nourishment of our souls, as bread is the nourishment of our bodies; and therefore doth he sometimes call his body bread, and at other times bread his body. And all the resemblance betwixt them consisting only in the bread’s nourishment of the body as Christ doth the soul; if the bread should lose its nourishing faculty, it would not be any whit like to Christ’s body, nor could it be the sacrament of it; and whensoever bread is not eaten, but re¬ served or carried about, though it may have it, yet it doth not exert any such virtue, and by consequence loseth its re¬ semblance to Christ’s body, and so ceaseth to be sacramental bread any longer. And therefore they must know, that the h Neque enim ideo minus est adorandum quod fuerit a Christo Domino ut sumatur institutum. Ibid. i Si enim sacramenta quandam similitudinem earum rerum quarum sacramenta sunt non haberent, om- nino sacramenta non essent. Aug. Epist. [98. 9. vol. II.] ad Bonifa- cium. k Sicut panis communis quern quotidie edimus vita est corporis, ita panis iste supersubstantialis vita est animae et sanitas mentis. Cy¬ prian. de ccena Domini, [p. 40. ad calc.] Potus et esus ad eandem pertinent rationem, quibus sicut corporea nutritur substantia, et vivit et incolumis perseverat, ita vita spi- ritus hoc proprio alimento nutritur. Ibid. [p. 41.] XXVIII. Of the Lord's Supper. 489 bread they reserve and carry about, is not the body of Christ, nor hath any relation to it upon that very account, because they reserve and carry it about, and do not eat it. And if these considerations will not convince them, let them in the last place take notice of the testimonies of the primitive church. Origen (or as others think St. Cyril) saith, 1 “ The Lord said to them, concerning the bread which he gave to his disciples, Take and eat; he did not defer it, nor command it to be kept till to-morrow.” And St. Cyprian, shewing the differ¬ ence betwixt the sacramental bread and the shew-bread, saith, the sacramental bread “ is incorporated not injured, received not included.” As if he should have said, the shew-bread was included in the ark of the covenant, but so is not this; it is only received, not included or shut up in any thing, and by consequence not reserved. And in the Second Epistle to St. James, attributed to Clemens Romanus, we find it written, n “ Let as many sacrifices be offered upon the altar as may suffice the people i and if any remain, let them not be reserved till to-morrow, but with fear and dread be consumed by the diligence of the clerks.” To this purpose also it was determined in the Csesaraugus- tane council: 0 “ If it be proved that any one, having received the grace of the Lord's supper, hath not consumed or eaten it up, let him be anathema for ever.” And in the first council at Toledo, p “ If any one shall not consume the eucharist re¬ ceived of the priest, let him be put away as a sacrilegious person.” Which canon was explained and confirmed again in the eleventh council at Toledo, an. 675 q. To this we may also add the several ways whereby the 1 Dominus de pane, quem disci- pulis dabat, dicebat eis, Accipite et manducate; non distulit, nec reser- vari jussit in crastinum. Origen. in Lev. hom. 5. [vol. II. p. 211.] m Incorporatur non injuriatur, recipitur non includitur. Cyprian, de ccena Domini, [p. 42.] n Tanta in altario holocausta of- ferantur quanta populo sufficere de- beant. Quod si remanserint, non reserventur in crastinum, sed cum timore et tremore clericorum dili- gentia consumantur. Clem. Epist. 2. ad Jac. [p. 360.] 0 Eucharistiae gratiam si quis pro- batur acceptam in ecclesia non sump- sisse, anathema sit in perpetuum. Concil. Caesaraugust. can. 3. [Con- cil. vol. I.] p Si quis autem acceptam a sa- cerdote eucharistiam non sumpserit, velut sacrilegus propellatur. Concil. Tolet. 1. c. 14. [p. 991. vol. I.] Concil. Tolet. undecim. cap. 11. [p. 1028. vol. III.] 490 Art. XXVIII. Of the Lord's Supper. primitive church used to dispose of the sacramental bread and wine which was left after the communicants had all received. Evagrius tells us, r “ There was an ancient custom at Constan¬ tinople, that when many pieces of the undefiled body of Christ our Lord were left after the communion, such young youths as went to school were sent for, and eat them up.” But St. Jerome tells us, that s “ after the communion, whatsoever was left of the bread and wine, the communicants themselves eating a common supper in the church, did consume them to¬ gether.” And Hesychius saith, t “ What was left used to be consumed in the fire.” Whence we may observe, that even what was left after the communion was not reserved; but though some used one, others another way, yet all used some way or other to consume it, so that it might not be reserved. And if the primitive church was against the reservation, surely it was much more against the adoration of the sacra¬ ment, holding, as we have shewed before, that no person or thing, under any pretence whatsoever, ought to be worshipped besides God. I know it is not bare bread our adversaries say they worship, but Christ in the bread, or the bread in the name of Christ. But I wish them to consider what Gregory Nyssen long ago said, uU He that worshippeth a creature, though he do it in the name of Christ, is an idolater, giving the name of Christ to an idol.” And therefore, let them not be angry at us for concluding them to be idolaters, whilst they eat one piece of the bread, and worship the other , and for asserting that the sacraments ought to be reserved , carried about , or worshipped. r J/ E 60s naXacov ( 3 ov\eTai ava rr)v fiacn\evovcrav, or av 7 ro\v tl xprjpa. Tcov ayicov pep'ibcov tov axpavTov c rco- paTos XpLcrrov tov Qeov r)pd>v ivano- pelvoi, naidas dcfrdopovs peTanipnTovs yiyveadai nep\ tcov is ^a/xaiSiSao"Ka- \oVS (pOLTCOVTCOV, KCU TClVTa KClTtadUlV. Pk r agr. hist, eccles. 1 . 4. c. [36.] s Et post communionem quaecun- que eis de sacrificiis superfuissent, illi in ecclesia comraunem coenam comedentes pariter consumebant. Hieron. in 1 Cor. xi. [p.931. vol. t Sed hoc quod reliquum est de carnibus et panibus in igne incendi praecepit. Quod nunc videmus etiam sensibiliter in ecclesia fieri, ignique tradi quaecunque remanere contigerit inconsumpta. Hesych. in Lev. 1 . 2. [p. 49. D.] u 'O yap to KTicrpa Tvpocncvvcov , Kav in ovopaTi tov ^LpiaTOv tovto noifj, el8oo\o\a.Tpr)s icrr'c, tov 'KpicrTov ovopa tw ei8cb\cp flipevos. Greg. Nyssen. orat. funeb. Placillae, [p. 533 - vol. III.] ARTICLE XXIX. OF THE WICKED, WHICH DO NOT EAT THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST, IN THE USE OF THE LORD’S SUPPER. The wicked , and such as he void of a lively faith, al¬ though they do carnally and visibly press with their teeth (as St. Augustine saith) the sacramen t of the body and blood of Christ, yet in no wise are they partakers of Christ, but rather to their condemna¬ tion do eat and drink the sign or sacrament of so great a thing. I T being not after a carnal but spiritual manner only, as we have seen in the foregoing article, that the body and blood of Christ are eaten and drunken in the sacrament, it must needs be a spiritual person, not a carnal, that can eat and drink it. For though a spiritual person may do some things carnally, yet a carnal person can never do any thing spiritually. And therefore, though godly and spiritual men may feed upon the body and blood of Christ a out of the sacrament as well as in it, yet wicked and carnal men miss of the body and blood of Christ in the sacrament as well as out of it. They may indeed eat the bread which signifies the Lord, but they cannot a Bibere autem dicimur sangui- nem Christi, non solum sacramen- torum ritu, sed et cum sermones ejus recipimus in quibus vita con¬ sists. Origen. in Numb. xxiv. [horn, xvi. fin. vol. II. p. 334.] Nulli est aliquatenus am bigendum tunc unum- quemque fideliutn corporis sangui- nisque Dominici participem fieri, quando in baptismate membrum Christi efficitur, nec alienari ab illius panis calicisque consortio, etiamsi antequam panem ilium comedat et calicem bibat, de hoc sseculo in imi¬ tate corporis Christi constitutus ab- scedat. Sacramenti quippe illius participatione ac beneficio non pri- vatur, quando ipse hoc, quod illud sacramentum significat, invenit. Aug. serm. ad infantes de Sacra¬ mento, apud Bedam in 1 Cor. x. [Bed. p. 365. vol. VI.] 492 Of the Wicked , which do not eat the Body Art. feed upon the Lord which is signified by the bread. They may take down the bread and wine into their bodies, but not receive the body and blood of Christ into their souls. And truly, we need not go far to prove this, even that wicked men do not eat the body and blood of Christ; for if they eat the body and blood of Christ they are not wicked men, but such as dwell in Christ, and have Christ dwelling in them; as Christ himself assures us, He that eateth my flesh , and drinketh my blood , dwelleth in me , and I in him , John vi. 56. He that dwelleth in Christ, and Christ in him, can be no wicked man; but he that eats and drinks the body and blood of Christ, dwells in Christ, and hath Christ dwelling in him, and there¬ fore cannot possibly be a wicked man. And if he that eats and drinks the body and blood of Christ can be no wicked man, it must needs follow that no wicked man can eat and drink the body and blood of Christ. But this is not all: for a wicked man doth not only miss of the grace signified by the bread and wine ; but in eating and drinking the bread and wine that signify that grace, they do but eat and drink damnation to themselves. For the apostle saith expressly, Whosoever shall eat this bread , and drink this cup of the Lord , unworthily , shall be guilty of the body and blood of Christ, 1 Cor. xi. 27; yea, He that eateth and drinketh un¬ worthily , eateth and drinketh damnation to himself not discern¬ ing the Lord's body , ver. 29. Not as if the sacraments them¬ selves were the cause of their damnation; but because their coming with sinful hearts to it b becomes an aggravation of their sins; even as Christ himself, who came into the world for our salvation, by reason of their unbelief, becomes to many an occasion of their greater damnation, John iii. 19. And thus the same sacrament that is to the godly the savour of life unto life, and not of death unto death, to the wicked is the savour of death unto death only, and not of life unto life; the one finds a blessing in it, and no breach, the other finds a breach in it, and no blessing; the one so eats and drinks the b rr £l(mep yap rj ivapovala avrov, fj pvcrTrjpia pei^ovos ecpolha KoXacrfcos ra pcyaXa exeiva Kai. anoppijra Kopi- yiverai rot? ava^icos pere^ovaL. Chry- cracra rjp 1 ^ ayaOa, rovs prj de^apevovs SOSt. in I Corinth, hom. 28. [p.424. avrrjv paWov xarexpivcp' ovrco xal ra 13. vol. III.] XXIX. and Blood of Christ in the Lord's Supper. 493 bread and wine, as to partake of the body and blood of Christ, the other eats and drinks the bread and wine, so as to be guilty of the body and blood of Christ; the one eats and drinks salvation, the other damnation to himself. And this was the doctrine of the primitive church. Origen saith, c “ Many things may be spoken also concerning the Word itself, which was made flesh and true food, whom who¬ soever eateth shall certainly live to eternity, whom no wicked man can eat. For if it could be that he that still remains a sinner should eat the Word which was made flesh, seeing he is the Word and the bread of life, it would not have been written, Whosoever eateth this bread shall live for ever and how they get hurt too as well as no good at the sacrament, the same Father expresseth it elsewhere, saying, du Dost thou not fear to communicate of the body of Christ when thou comest to the eucharist, as if thou wast clean, as if thou hadst nothing of unworthiness in thee ? and in all these things dost thou think thou shalt escape the judgment of God ? Dost thou not remember what is said, For for this cause many are weak and sick , and many sleep amongst you ? Why are many weak \ Because they do not judge nor examine themselves, nor under¬ stand what it is to communicate with the church, nor what it is to come to such and so great sacraments. They suffer what they that are sick of fevers use to suffer, whilst they presume to eat the meat of the healthful, bringing destruction to themselves.” To this purpose makes that of St. Cyprian ; e “ The sacra- c Multa porro et de ipso verbo dici possent quod factum est caro, verusque cibus, quem qui comederit omnino vivet in eeternum, quem null us malus potest edere. Etenim si fieri posset, ut qui malus adhuc perseverat edat verbum factum car- nem, cum sit verbum et panis vivus, nequaquam scriptum fuisset, Quis- quis ederit panem hunc vivet in ceter- num. Origen. in Mat. xv. [p. 500. vol. III.] d Comm unicare non times corpus Christi accedens ad eucharistiam quasi mundus et purus, quasi nihil in te sit indignum, et in his omnibus putas quia effugias judicium Dei ? Non recordaris illud quod dictum est, Quia propterea in vobis injirmi et cegri et dormiunt multi ? Quare multi infirmi ? Quoniam seipsos non dijudicant neque seipsos examinant, nec intelligunt quid est communi- care tarn eximia sacramenta. Pati- untur hoc quod febricitantes pati so- lent, cum sanorum cibos praesumunt sibimetipsis inferentes exitium. Id. in Psal. 37. hom. 2. [p. 688. vol. II.] e Sacramenta quidem, quantum in se est, sine propria esse virtute non possunt, nec ullo modo divina se absentat majestas mysteriis. Sed 494 Art. Of the Wicked , which do not eat the Body ments, as much as in them is, can never be without their proper virtue, neither doth the Divine Majesty any way absent itself from the mysteries. But though the sacraments suffer themselves to be taken and touched by unworthy per¬ sons, yet they cannot be partakers of the Spirit, whose infi¬ delity and unworthiness contradicts so great piety. There¬ fore to some these gifts are the savour of life unto life, to others the savour of death unto death. 1 ' 1 And elsewhere : f “ He that is down threatens them that stand, and the wounded such as are whole; and because he may not pre¬ sently receive the body of the Lord with his polluted hands, or drink the blood of the Lord with his defiled mouth, the sacrilegious fellow is angry at the priests. But O thy exceed¬ ing madness, thou furious person ! Thou art angry at him that strives to turn the wrath of God from thee ! Thou threatenest him that beggeth the mercy of God for thee, who is sensible of thy wound, which thou thyself art not sensible of r But I need not search the Fathers for the confirmation of this article, for it is indeed almost word for word taken out of a Father, St. Augustine by name, who is quoted in it; for he in his Comment upon the Gospel of St. John hath this passage, S “ And by this, he that doth not dwell in Christ, and in whom Christ doth not dwell, without all doubt doth not spi¬ ritually eat his body nor drink his blood, though he may carnally and visibly press with his teeth the sacrament of the quamvis ab indignis se sumi vel contingi sacramenta permittant, non possunt tamen spiritus esse parti- cipes, quorum infidelitas vel indig- nitas tantae sanctitudini contradicit. Ideoque aliis sunt haec munera odor vitae in vitam, aliis odor mortis in mortem. Cyprian, de coena Do¬ mini, [p.41. ad calc.] f Jacens stantibus et integris vul- neratus minatur, et quod non statim Domini corpus inquinatis manibus accipiat, aut ore polluto Domini sanguinem bibat, sacerdotibus sa- crilegus irascitur. Atque o tuam nimiam furiose dementiam ! irasceris ei qui abs te avertere iram Dei ni- titur! ei minaris qui pro te Domini misericordiam deprecatur, qui vulnus tuum sentit, quod ipse non sentis ! Id. serm. de lapsis, [p. 131.] & Ac per hoc qui non manet in Christo et in quo non manet Chris- tus, proculdubio nec manducat spi- ritualiter carnem ejus nec bibit ejus sanguinem, licet carnaliter et visibi- liter premat dentibus sacramentum corporis et sanguinis Christi. Sed magis tantae rei sacramentum ad judicium sibi manducat et bibit, quia immundus praesumpsit ad Christi accedere sacramenta quae aliquis non digne sumit nisi qui mundus est. Aug. in Joh. tract. 26. [18. vol. III. par. ii.] 495 XXIX. and Blood of Christ in the Lord's Supper. body and blood of Christ; but rather, to his judgment or condemnation, eateth and drinketh the sacrament of so great a thing; because being unclean, he presumed to come to the sacraments of Christ, which no one can worthily receive but he that is clean.” In which passage the sense of this article being so fully contained, and it being the place, I suppose, cited in the article itself, I shall not add any more to it; but only conclude with that of St. Basil: h “ Let us therefore cleanse ourselves from all defilements, and so let us come to these holy things, that we may escape the judgment of those that killed the Lord. For whosoever eateth this bread, and drinketh this cup of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.” h Kcidapevcraipev rotvvv cmd Tvavros rov K vpiov dvai-icos, evo^os earcu rov poXvcrpov, Kai ovrcos rrpocrep^copev (rcopciros kcu rov diparos rov K vpiov. rois ciyloLs iva pev to Kpipa rd>v Basil, de baptismo, 1 . 2. qusest. 3. ( bovev(jdvT(ov rov Kvpiov' 8 iori os civ fvol. 1.1 >/!/ \ V * / \ / ecroir} rov aprov, r) 7nvrj to 7rorr]piov ARTICLE XXX. OF BOTH KINDS. The cup of the Lord is not to he denied to the lay people; for both the parts of the Lord’s sacrament, by Christ’s ordinance and commandment , ought to be ministered to all Christian men alike . W HEN our Lord Christ instituted the sacrament of his supper, he was pleased to ordain two signs to be used in the administration of it, bread and wine, the one to repre¬ sent his body, the other his blood. But about four hundred years ago, the church of Home, for reasons best known to herself, thought good to make a countermand, that bread and wine should not be both administered to all communicants* but that the lay people should be content with the bread only without the wine, yea and the clergy too, if there were any present besides him that consecrated it. So that in few words a they ordained and still use to deny the cup, and to administer the bread only to all the communicants, the priest that consecrates it reserving every drop of the wine for him¬ self. Now against this wild practice of the church of Rome our church of England is pleased in this article to set herself, determining that the cup of the Lord is not to be denied to the lay people. Neither is this only here asserted, but con¬ firmed too : so that I need go no further for the proof of the article than to the article itself. And the reason that is here a Quod vero ad communicandi sacrificio conficientes, sub utraque ritum pertinet, doceant parochi sane- specie sacram eucharistiam sumat. tae ecclesiae lege interdictum esse ne Catechism, ad parochos, [par. ii. de quis sine ipsius ecclesiae autoritate, euch. 69. p. 210.] praeter sacerdotes corpus Domini in Art. XXX Of both Kinds. 4')7 brought is from Christ’s institution and command, For by the ordinance and commandment of Christ, both the parts of the sacrament, viz. both bread and wine, ought to be administered to all Christian men. And to prove this proof of the article, we may take notice of the words of institution themselves. After therefore he had distributed the bread, St. Matthew saith, And he took the cup , and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying. Drink ye all of it, Matth. xxvi. 27. St. Mark, And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it, Mark xiv. 23. St. Luke, Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you, Luke xxii. 20. St. Paul, After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me, 1 Cor. xi. 25. In all which places we may observe all these things making for our purpose. First, that the bread is never spoken of. but still the cup is brought in after it. Secondly, that as the bread is still brought in to represent his body, not his blood, so is the cup still brought in to represent his blood, not his body. So that neither of them is appointed to represent both; and by consequence, he that is partaker of the bread only doth not partake of his blood; neither doth he that is partaker of the wine only partake of his body ; but to partake both of body and blood, we must receive both the bread and wine. Thirdly, that St. Luke ushers in the institution of the cup with the word likewise. Likewise also the cup; and St. Paul, After the same manner also the cup; so that after the same manner that he instituted the bread, he instituted the cup also: now our adversaries themselves acknowledge he insti¬ tuted the bread so as to be communicated to all; and there¬ fore we may well say, he likewise and after the same manner instituted the cup too to be administered to all. Fourthly, that in St. Matthew he said, Drink ye all of it, and in St. Mark, They all drank of it, expressions not to be found in the institution of the bread; as if he foresaw this very cor¬ ruption that the devil would bring into his ordinance, even that though all should be suffered to eat the bread, yet all BEVERIDGE. K k 498 Art. Of both Kinds. should not be suffered to drink the cup. Therefore hath he left a particular command, that all should drink of the cup; so that if either of the parts might be omitted, certainly the bread should be rather omitted than the cup, it being so expressly and in plain terms commanded, that all should drink of the cup ; whereas there is no such express command for all to eat of the bread. And our Saviour commanding them all to drink of it, in obeisance to his command they all drank of it; so that though it be not said, They all ate the bread , yet it is said, They all drank of the cup , even all the communicants, as well as he that consecrated it; to shew us that all are to drink the cup as well as eat the bread. Nay, lastly, it is here said, Do this , as oft as ye do it , in remembrance °f me. Do this: what \ Eat the bread only ? No. Drink the cup only ? No; but administer and receive both bread and cup, in remembrance of me, who have now administered both unto you. And therefore, Do this , was not brought in till the cup was administered as well as the bread. And therefore it cannot possibly be denied, but that according to Christ’s institution the cup is to be administered to all Christian men as well as the bread, that being an essential part of the sacrament as well as this. And seeing Christ hath joined them both together, it is not for man to put them asunder; but as St. Cyprian observes, b “ We are admonished, that in offering the cup the tradition of the Lord is to be ob¬ served ; neither is any thing to be done by us, but what the Lord hath done before us.” And afterwards, c “ If it be not lawful to break the least of Christ’s commands, how much more is it not lawful to infringe such great ones, so mys¬ terious, so much appertaining to the sacrament of the Lord’s passion and our redemption, or to change it by human tradi- b Admonitos nos scias quod in magis tam magna, tam grandia, tam calice offerendo Dominica traditio ad ipsum Dominicae passionis et servetur, neque aliud fiat a nobis nostrae redemptionis sacramentum quam quod pro nobis Dominus prior pertinentia fas non est infringere, fecerit. Cypriani epist. lib. 2. epist. aut in aliud quam quod divinitus [63.] ad Caecilium fratrem. institutum est humana traditione c Quod si nec minima de man- mutare? Ibid. [p. 155.] datis Dominicis licet solvere, quanto XXX. Of hoth Kinds . 499 tion into any thing else but what was divinely instituted!" And St. Ambrose, d “He saith, it is unworthy of the Lord, whosoever celebrates the mystery otherwise than it was deli¬ vered. For he cannot be devout who presumes otherwise than is given by the Author. Therefore he (St. Paul) admo- nisheth that his mind who comes to the eucharist of the Lord be devout according to the order that is delivered. 11 To this institution of Christ, I might add many more reasons to prove, that in the Lord's Supper both bread and wine are to be administered ; but that its very being the Lord's Supper, one should think, might be reason enough for it; for it is but a bad supper where there is bread only, and not drink. So that to deny the cup to the communicants is to deprive them of one part of their supper ; yea, and to deprive the communion itself of the perfect nature of a sacrament, by destroying the analogy betwixt the sign and the thing signified, which, as we have seen, consisteth in the resemblance there is betwixt bread and wine's nourishing of our bodies, and Christ's feeding of our souls. Whereas we know that bread without wine, or some liquid thing or other in its stead, is not the whole and perfect nourishment of our bodies; and therefore not like to Christ, who is alone the perfect food and nourishment of our souls. And e seeing there¬ fore this sacrament was ordained for the spiritual nourishment of our souls, as bread and wine together make up the perfect nourishment of our bodies, neither of them is to be denied to any, but both administered to all communicants. And if we consult antiquity, we shall find that in the first three hundred years besure the people partaked of the cup as well as bread. In the Liturgy ascribed to St. James it is d Indignum dicit Domino, qui spiritualem refectionem quae cor- aliter mysterium celebrat quam ab porali conformatur. Ad corporalem eo traditum est. Non enim potest autem refectionem duo requiruntur, devotus esse qui aliter prsesumit scilicet cibus, qui est alimentum quam datum est ab autore. Itaque siccum, et potus, qui est alimentum prsemonet ut secundum ordinem humidum. Et ideo etiam ad inte- traditum devota mens sit accedentis gritatem hujus sacramenti duo con- ad eucharistiam Domini. Ambros. currunt, scilicet spiritualis cibus et in i Cor. xi. [27. App. vol. II.] spiritualis potus. Thom. part. 3. e Hoc sacramentum ordinatur ad q. 73. Art. [2. vol. XII.] K k 2 500 Art. Of both Kinds. said, f “ And when the deacons take the dishes and cups to distribute to the people.' 1 And Justin Martyr in his second Apology for Christians saith expressly, s “ But the president having given thanks, and all the people praised God, those which are called deacons by us give to every one that is present to partake of the consecrated bread, and wine, and water; and they carry it also to those that are not present. 11 And St. Cyprian, h u There are some either ignorantly or simply consecrating the Lord's cup, and administering it to the common people, do not that which Jesus Christ our Lord and God, the author and doctor of this sacrifice, did and taught." And elsewhere, i “ Where the solemnities being ended, the deacon begins to offer the cup to those that are present." Yea, and Ignatius, k “ For there is one flesh of the Lord Christ, and his blood one that was shed for us; one bread that is broken to all, and one cup that is distributed to all." Neither did the next three hundred years deny the people what the first, according to Christ's institution, granted them. 1 “ This is the manner," saith Athanasius, “ of this cup, and no other; this do you lawfully give the people to drink of." And St. Hilary, m “ If the faults be not so great, that a man may be excommunicated, he ought not to separate himself * f/ Ore e7ralpovcnv ol SuIkovoi tovs 8lctkovs Kal tovs Kparr/pas els to perabovvai t(o A aw. Liturg. Jacob. [P- 21 ;] \ & Ev^apicrTrjcravTOs de tov npoecr- tcotos Kal e 7 T€v(fir)pr] 0 ' a VTOS ttcivtos tov A aov, ol KaXovpevoi Trap 77yu.I1/ biciKovoi didoacriv eKaarco twv TvapovTcov peTa- Xaftelv 11776 tov evxapicrTrjdevTos apTov, kcu o’ivov, kcll v8(itos , Kal roiy ov 7rapovcriv d. 7 ro(j)epovcri. Justin, apol. [I; 65 .] h Tamen quoniam quidam vel ig- noranter vel simpliciter in calice Dominico sanctificando et plebi ad- ministrando non hoc faciunt quod Jesus Christus Dominus et Deus noster sacrificii hujus auctor et doctor fecit et docuit. Cypriani epist. [63. init.] ad Caecilium fratrem. 1 Ubi solennibus adimpletis cali- cem diaconus offerre prsesentibus coepit. Id. de lapsis, [p. 132.] k Mta yap £v evpedrjvai iv rf/ (lacriXeia, cos ’A (3paap, Kal ’ic raciK, Ka\ ’laKoofi, cos ’io oar)(j), Kal ’I craiov, Kal tcov aXXcov npocforjTciov, coy II erpov, Kal IIcnAou, Ka'i tcov aXXcov dnocrTO- Xcov, tcov ydpois npoaopiXrjcrdvTcov. Ignat, epist. ad Philad. [p. 98.] e ’Ei/ be Trj via diaOrjKrj, olos Tle- rpos rjv, Kal oi Xoinol tcov anocrToXcov. Basil, de abdicat. rerum, [p. 371. vol. II.] f TleTpos pev ycip Kal <&iXmnos inaibonoirpjavTO, $ iXmnos be ko.1 tcis OvyaTepas dvbpdaiv i^ebcoKev' 6 be TIaCXos ovk oKvei iv Tivl inicrToXrj tt)v avTOv npoaayopevcrai crv^vydv. Clem. Strom. 3. [p. 535. vol. I.] cit. ab Euseb. hist, eccles. [p. 259. vol. I.] 1 . 3. Keifi, X. S ’EnlcrKonos rj npecr^vrepos r) bia- kovos, TTjv iavTOv yvvaiKci prj eK(3a- Xctco npocfidcrei evXa(3elas’ iciv be iK(3aXfj dcfoopi^ecrdco' inipevaov be, KadaipeicrOco. Can. apost. 5 * [p* 2 35 -] c £2y el 7 rpocfoacrei evXa!3elas iepco- pevos tt]v yvvaiKa avTov dnonepy\rr 7 - tch, ds, 6 tolov- tos els xnrppecriav eXdelv ov dvvaTaC eav 8e kv yapeTurv avTcov fiovXovTai tovtovs. Zon. * Non nisi unius uxoris viri, iidemque virginibus copulati, diaconi vel presbyteri ordinentur. Concil. Andegav. c. [11. p. 780. vol. II. Hard, cone.] u Placuit ut diaconos, si vel in- tegri et casti sint et continentis vitae, etiamsi uxores habeant, in ministerio constituantur. Concil. Tolet. 1. cap. 1. [p. 990. vol. I.] L 1 2 51G Of the Marr iage of Priests. Art. deacons, if they be sound and chaste, and of a continent life, may be placed in the ministry, although they have wives.” So that their marriage was no hinderance to their ministerial function. But the most remarkable passage is that of Paphnutius in the council of Nice, recorded by w Socrates, x Sozomen, y Gela- sius Cyzicenus, z Nicephorus, and others. The relation which Socrates gives of it is this: au And let so much,” saith he, “ suffice to be spoken concerning that one thing of Paphnutius. But now I will declare what came to pass, by the means of his counsel, to the benefit of the church and the ornament of those that are ordained. It seemed good to the bishops (in the council of Nice) to bring a new law into the church, that those that are consecrated, I mean bishops, priests, and deacons, should not lie with their wives which they married when laymen. And they having propounded to consult about that matter, Paphnutius, standing up in the midst of the assembly, spake aloud, that so heavy a yoke should not be laid upon consecrated persons, saying, that the bed is honour¬ able and marriage undefiled; that they must have a care lest they injure the church by too great severity, for all cannot bear the exercise of so much freeness from passion, neither could w Socrat. 1. i. c. [n.j x Soz. 1.1. c. [23.] y Gelas. Cyz. act. concil. Nic. 1 . 2. C. 33. [p. 438- vol. I.] z Niceph. 1 . 8 . c. 19. [vol. I.] a Ei/ pev ovv tovto Tvepl II acpvov- tlov elpqcrOco' o 8e Trpbs XvcnTeXeiav T7]S eKxXqCTLaS KCU KOCTpOV TCOV UpCO- pevcov Sm Tqv avrov avp[3oXqv yeyove, diqyqcropaL. ’E doxei Tois enLcrKoizoLS vopov veapbv els Tqv exxXqcriav elcrcpe- peiv, cos re rovs iepcopevovs, Xeyc 0 8e emarKOTrovs, xal npecrdvrepovs, xal dcaxovovs, pq crvyxaOevdeiv rais yape- tcus, as en Xa'ixol ovres qyayovTO. Kai enel Tvepl tovtov /3ovXeveaOai 7 rpov- Keiro, diavaaTcis ev peaco rod crvX- Xoyov tcov emaKomov 6 tlacpvovnos, e/3oa paxpd, pq ftapqv Cvyov emOeivai tois lepcopevocs dvdpd.cn' ripiov eivai xal Tqv kolttjv, xal avrov dpiavrov tov yapov Xeycov, pq 777 inTepftoXr) tt)s axpifielas, pdXXov rrjv exxXqcriav TTpoa^Xdxjrcocnv’ ov yap navras dv- vacrdai (frepeiv rrjs dnraOelas rrjv daxq- cnv, ovde ’Icrcos (f)vXa)(dqaecrdai Tqv crcocppoavvqv Tqs exdcrTov yaperr/s' crco(f)poavvqv de exdXei xal rrjs voplpov yvvaixos rqv crvveXevaiv' dpxeicrOai re tov (j)6d(ravTa xXqpov rv^elv, pqxeTi enl yapov ep^ecrOai Kara rrjv rrjs exxXqcrlas dp^alav rrapadocriv' pq pev ano^evywcrdai ravrqs, qv ana^ qdq nporepov Xa'ixos v yapov, Kai anXcos elneiv, yvvaixos’ ex iraidbs yap ev dcrxqTqplep dveredpanTO’ xal enl crco- < ppocrvvq, el xal rts ciXXos, cbv rvepi- (36qTos % TvelOeraL Tvas 6 tcov iepcopevcov crvXXoyos tois UacfrvovTiov Xoyois’ dio xal TTjv ivepl tovtov tjjTqcnv drvecriyq- crav, Trj yvcopq tcov fiovXopevcov dir- e^eadai Tqs opiXlas tcov yapercbv xaTaXetyavTes‘ xal TocravTa pev 7 repl JJacpvovTLov. Socrat. hist, eccles. 1.1. c. [11.] XXXII. Of the Marriage of Priests. 517 the continency of every man’s wife be so well preserved : but the use of a man’s lawful wife he called continency or chastity: but it is enough that they that come into the clergy do not marry according to the ancient tradition of the church : but that they should not be separated from those which before when laymen they had married. And this he said, having himself never touched a wife, nor scarce a woman ; for from a child he was brought up in a monastery, and for his conti¬ nency was as famous as any. The whole assembly of sacred persons assented to the words of Paphnutius, and therefore they ceased from any further inquiry into this business, leaving every one to his liberty whether he will abstain from his wife or no. And so much concerning Paphnutius.” So far Socrates. From whence we may observe how this most renowned council that ever was since our Saviour's time, assenting to Paphnutius's words, or, as Sozomen expresseth it, b “approving of his counsel,” acknowledged that marriage was as lawful, and the bed as undefiled, and the use of their lawful wives an act of continency and chastity even in bishops, priests, and deacons, of whom he only spake, as well as in any others; from whence it must needs follow, that it is as lawful for them as any others to marry. And thus we see how the primitive church still acknowledged the truth of this doctrine, neither do we read it much opposed by any but the church of Rome and her complices. The first that set himself against it was pope c Siricius, after him Inno¬ cent the First, d John the Thirteenth, Leo the Ninth, and others; but the most implacable enemy was e Gregory the Seventh or pope Hildebrand, about the year 1073; f about h ’E7 TrjVGcre 8e teal rj avvodos tt]V (3ov\t)v, kcu 7repi tovtov ovdev ivofxo- 6 tTr)pas ipirenX'qcrpeva npoficiTci tu>v vyiaivovrcov inreipyovenv, iva anode- peva tt)v appcocTTLav, per dcrc()a\eLas 7r pos rd vyiaivovra iiraveXOp ttoKlv, Kcii prj vcxtovvtci ti)v dyekrjv dnaaiiv ep 7 r\r] a H T V S appeoartas tKelvrjS. Chry- sost. orat. in David et Saul, 3. tom. v - P- 8 9 - [ 33-1 XXXIII. how they are to be avoided. 523 excommunicate persons, as heathens and publicans, until they be received again into the church. Neither let any one think this is a new coined doctrine, for it was Gregory the Great's counsel long ago, d “ But such as are suspended from ecclesiastical communion, let no religious person be joined to, according to the commands of the canons." And truly there are many canons of the primitive church that command this : as, the tenth canon attributed to the apostles, e “ If any one shall pray with him that is excom¬ municated, let him be also excommunicated." The council at Antioch, f “ It is not lawful to communicate with such as are excommunicated, nor to go from house to house to pray with such as do not pray in the church, nor for such to be received in one church as do not assemble in another. But if any bishop, priest, or deacon shall be found to communicate with those that are excommunicated, let him be also excommunicated, as one that confounds the order of the church." The third, or. as some think, the fourth, council at Carthage : g “ Whosoever shall communicate or pray with one that is excommunicated, whether he be a clergy or a lay man, let him be excommunicated." The first council at Toledo : h “ If any layman be excommu¬ nicated, let no clergyman nor any religious person go to him or his house ; and so likewise a clergyman, if he be excom¬ municated, let him be avoided by the clergy; but if any one shall be taken talking or eating with him, let him also be ex- d Eis vero qui ab ecclesiastica communione suspensi sunt nullus religiosus secundum canonum prse- cepta jungatur. Greg, epist. 1. [4. ep. 27. vol. II.] ad Januarium. e Et tls aKoivoivrjTco Kav iv olkoo crvvev^rjTcu ovtos dcpopL^eadco. Can. apost. 10. [Bever. Synod, vol. I.] f M?) i^elvai 8e kolvcovcIv rols awn- vcovr/Tois, [xrjfte kclt olkovs crvve\66v- tcis crvvevxeaOcu rois / x ?) rfj eKKXijcrla (rw(V)^OfJi€voLs, p.rj8e iv eripa iiaeXrjcrLq V7rodixecrOcii tovs iv iripq iKKXrjcriq p,rj avvayopivovs’ el 8e (pavelr] ris rcov eTUfTKontov f] npe(r[3vTepv r) diciKovcov fj TLS TOV KUVOVOS Tols a.KOLVCOvi]TOLS kolvoovo)v Km tovtov aKOLVoovrjTOv eivai cos civ (Tvyxiovra rov Kavova rr/s e<- KXrjcrLas. Concil. Antioch, can. 2. [p. 593. vol. I.] ; citat. et a concil. Tribur. cap. 2. [p. 439. par. i. vol. VI.] & Qui communicaverit vel orave- rit cum excommunicato, sive clericus sive laicus, excommunicetur. Con¬ cil. Carthag. 3. can. 73. [p. 983. Ibid.] h Si quis laicus abstinetur, ad hunc vel ad domum ejus vel cleri- corum vel religiosorum nullus acce- dat. Similiter et clericus si absti¬ netur a clericis devitetur. Si quis autem illo colloqui aut convivari fuerit apprehensus etiam ipse absti- neatur. Concil. Tolet. 1. c. 15. [p. 991. vol. I. Hard.] 524 Of excommunicated Persons , Art. communicated/ 1 The council at Auxerre : 1 “ It is not lawful to communicate with one that is excommunicated, nor to eat meat with him/ 1 And presently : k “ If any priest, or any of the clergy or of the people, shall knowingly receive one that is excommunicated, without the consent of him that excommu¬ nicated him, or shall eat bread with him, or appoint to talk with him, he shall have the like sentence passed upon him/ 1 And the second Lateran council: 1 “ But whosoever shall pre¬ sume knowingly to communicate with one that is excommu¬ nicated, before he be absolved by him that excommunicated him, let him be held liable to the same sentence/ 1 And thus I find the council of Sardice too, (in their synodical letters to all the bishops in the world recorded by Theodoret,) counsel¬ ling them m that they command that none communicate with the Arians, whom they had excommunicated. To these we might also add the many canons of the primi¬ tive church forbidding such as are excommunicated by one to be received into communion by another: as the famous coun¬ cil at Nice; n “ Concerning those that are excommunicated, whether of the clergy or lay order, let this sentence, according to rule, be observed by the bishops of all provinces, command¬ ing that they that are cast out by one be not received by others/ 1 The same was also decreed in several other councils: as °in the council of Arles, and Pothers; and among the rest 1 Non licet cum excommunicato communicare, vel cum eo cibum sumere. Concil. Antisiodor, c. 38. [p.446. vol. III. Ibid.] k Si quis presbyter aut quilibet de clero aut de populo excommunicatum absque voluntate ipsius, qui eum ex- communicavit, sciens receperit, aut cum illo panem manducaverit, vel colloquium habere decreverit, simili sententiae subjacebit. Ibid. can. 39. 1 Qui vero excommunicato, ante- quam ab eo qui eum excommunica- verit absolvatur, scienter communi¬ care praesumpserit, pari sententiae teneatur obnoxius. Concil. Lateran. 2. can. 3. [p. 1208. vol. VI. par. ii.] m T ovtols prjdtva Koivcovecv napay- ye'iKare' ovdepla yap Kcuviovla cpcor'i 7 rpbs CTKOTOS' TOVTOVS 7T(ivT€S fiaKpav noieire. Apud Theodoret. hist, ec- cles. 1 . 2. c. [6. p. 595. vol. III.] n Ilept tcov aKOLvcovrjToov yevop.evcov, eire tcov tv KXrjpco, eire tcov XatKcS rayparL, vtto tcov Kaff eKacrTrjv tnap- X^ av tmcrKOTTCov, Kpareirco rj yvcoprj Kara tov Kavova tuv 8l ayopevovra tovs v(\) trepcov ct7ro(3Xr]devTas, v([) trepcov p.rj TvpocrUcrOai. Concil. Nicen. can. 5 - [P- 3 2 3 - vol. I.] 0 Concil. Arelat. 2. can. 8. [p. 773. vol. II.] p Concil. Antioch, can. 6. [p- 595 * vol. I. Cone. Hard.] Concil. Turon. 2. c. 8. [p. 359. vol. III.] v. et Con¬ cil. Arausic. 1. c. 11. [p. 1785. vol. I.] Concil. Paris. 3. c. 7. [p. 338. vol. III.] Concil. Lateran. 1. can. 9. [p. 1112. vol. VI.] Cartliag. 2. al. ult. c. 7. [p. 952. vol. I.] XXXIII. how they are to be avoided. 525 it was decreed in an ancient council in London, q “ Let no one presume to receive into communion him that is excommuni¬ cated by another: which if any one shall knowingly do, let him be also deprived of Christian communion. All which being put together, we may well conclude, that excommunicate persons, so long as excommunicate, ought to be avoided. <1 Nemo excommunicatum alterius communione careat Christiana. Con- praesumat in communionem susci- cil. Londinens. an. 1125. [cap. xi. pere: quod si scienter fecerit, et ipse p. 1126. par. ii. vol. VI.] ARTICLE XXXIV. OF THE TRADITIONS OF THE CHURCH. It is not necessary that traditions and ceremonies he in all places one, and utterly like; for at all times they have been divers, and may he changed ac¬ cording to the diversities of countries, times, and men's manners, so that nothing he ordained against God's word. Whosoever through h is pr ivate judg¬ ment) willingly and purposely, doth openly break the traditions and ceremonies of the church, which he not repugnant to the word of God, and he or¬ dained and approved hy common authority, ought to he rebuked openly, (that others may fear to do the like,) as he that offendeth against the common order of the church , and hurteth the authority of the magistrate, and woundeth the consciences of the weak brethren. W HAT the great God would have punctually observed in his worship, himself hath been pleased expressly to command in his word; so that nothing is to be looked upon as part of his worship but what himself hath commanded, and whatsoever himself hath commanded is necessarily to be ob¬ served as part of his worship. But there being many circum¬ stances required to the performance as well of religious as civil actions, and so to the worship of God as well as any thing else; as, for example, the time when, the place where, the habit in which his public service shall be performed, and the like, it being impossible it should be performed without Art. XXXIV. Of the Traditions of the Church. 527 these and the like circumstances; and seeing the all-wise God hath thought good not to determine these in his word, but to leave it to the discretion of the church to determine them as it shall see fit, only giving them this general rule to square all these their determinations by, Let all things be done decently and in order; hence it is that every particular church hath still thought fit to exercise this her power and authority, in determining these circumstances, according to that manner as seemeth to herself orderly and devout: so that there is no necessity that one church should determine them after the same manner that another doth ; nay, it is often necessary that one church should not follow another in this case; for it often so falls out that what is decent in one place is unseemly in another, and every church is bound to model circumstances according to that order which is the most seemly and decent in the place where it is settled. And hence we find how St. Paul, and after him Clemens Romanus, in a his epistle to the Corinthians, having shewn in general that all things should be done in all places decently and in order ; hence, I say, we find how the primitive churches still much differed in this their determination of the particular circumstances of divine wor¬ ship, as, amongst many other things, we may see in particular in the time of the celebration of Easter; which being but a mere circumstance, every one followed the tradition and custom of the church wherein he lived, in the celebration of it. l) Some churches celebrated it upon the fourteenth day of the first month, (as the Jews did the Passover,) let it fall a Hpodr]X(OV °VV bn" LV OVTCOV TOVTOdV , teal iyK€KV(p6T€s els tci (3adr] Tv/s Oelas yvcocrecos, Tvdvra ra£ci noielv ucpelXo- pev, ocret 6 decnroTTjs eVtTcXcti/ ckcA eu- crev’ Kara Kaipovs Teraypevovs rds tc npoacpopds Kai XeiTovpylas it ureXet- crdcu, Kai ovk elKrj t) draKrcos CKeXeucre v ylveaOai, aAX’ copiapevois Kaipois Kai &pais. Clem, epist. ad Corinth, p. 52. ol ovv tols 7 TpoareraypevoLS vt]crav eavrols, &C. ku.1 per elprj- eir^apicrriav. Ibid. vrjs an d\\r]\(ov dnrfKXdyrja-av, ndaijs h Kai nepl aXX cov rivcov piKpa rr/s eKKXrjcrlas elprjvrjv e^ovroov rcov rr]~ a^dvres npos dWrjXovs evOvs, elpr)- povvrcov, /cat prj Trfpovvriov. Ibid. vevaav, nepl rovrov rov KeifiaXaiov pr/ BEVERIDGE. M m 530 Of the Traditions of the Church. Art. that they are traditions and ceremonies, are not) is left to the prudential disposition of particular churches to enjoin or not enjoin them: and when they do enjoin them, they cannot enjoin them as things in themselves necessary, but only as necessarily to be observed in reference to the more orderly government of the church, as to the place and time then being. But though it be only lawful, not necessary, that any particular ceremonies should be enjoined, yet, when once enjoined, it is not only lawful, but necessary they should be observed, not because the ceremonies that are enjoined in themselves are necessarily to be observed, but because the power that doth enjoin them is necessarily to be obeyed. It is true the ceremonies and traditions are but traditions and ceremonies after as well as before they were enjoined, and so in themselves still indifferent, so that they may be done or not done without sin, as to any obligatory power seated in their own nature. But when once enjoined there comes an extrinsical obligation to them, binding all within the church that doth enjoin them to the faithful observation of them; so that though as ceremonies and traditions they are still indif¬ ferent in themselves, yet, being enjoined by lawful authority, they are not indifferent as to our use and practice, but we are bound to use them, not because ceremonies, but because en¬ joined, and because of him who hath commanded us to submit to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake , 1 Pet. ii. 13: though it be not ordained by God, and therefore indifferent in itself, yet if it be ordained by men it is necessary as to our use, who are bound to submit to every ordinance of man, even as for the Lord's sake, and to be subject to the higher powers, Bom. xiii. 1 ; and therefore we must needs acknowledge, that whosoever through his private judgment willingly and purposely doth openly break the traditions and ceremonies of the church , which be not repugnant to the ivord of God , (as if mere tra¬ ditions and ceremonies they are not,) and be ordained and approved by common authority , ought to be rebuked openly, that others may fear to do the like: and that for these three reasons : first, because he offendeth against the common order of the church : God hath commanded that all things in his church should be done decently and in order, but such a 5bl XX XIV. Of the Traditions of the Church. person breaks this the order of the church, and therefore ought certainly to be reproved. Secondly, he hurteth the authority of the magistrate, whom God hath commanded us to obey; and in what things are we to obey him in, if not in things of indifferency, as ceremonies and traditions all are ? Lastly, he wounds the consciences also of the weak brethren, and so causeth schisms and divisions and offences in the church; and all that do so the apostle commands us to avoid, Rom. xvi. 17. And certainly, if we consult the Fathers, they will tell us it is every one’s duty not to break but observe the several traditions and ceremonies, which, being not repugnant to the word of God, are enjoined by common authority in the church he lives in. k 44 The question therefore,” saith St. Basil to Amphilochius, 44 concerning the Cathari hath before been spoken to, and thou well mindedst and admonishedst, that the custom of every region is to be observed.’" And St. Au¬ gustine excellently : 144 But other things, which are changed according to the several places and regions of the earth, as for example, that some fast upon the sabbath day, others do not, &c., and the like such kind of things, have a free obser¬ vation ; neither is there any better discipline in these things to a grave and prudent Christian, than to do so as he sees the church to do unto which he shall chance to come ; for what¬ soever is enjoined, neither contrary to faith nor good manners, is indifferently to be accounted of, and to be observed and kept for their society amongst whom he lives.” And pre¬ sently he brings us an excellent passage which he had from St. Ambrose when discoursing with him: m 44 When I come k To fxev ov v nepl tovs KaOapovs £r)Trjpa Kai eiprjTCU irporepov, Kal kci- Xc 'os aTrepvrjpovevaas, on Sel rS eOei t5>v v oaoov aXkuyv oi p,iav kcu rrjv avrrjv 8o£av kcu Kplcriv e£evrjveyp.cvoi rrju avTrjv TeOeivrai. yfsrjcfiov. Ibid, [ad fin.] a Tcov 8e €7Tl Tr/S ’ACTIOS CTVICTKOTVOAV to ivaXat nporepov avTols napciftodev diacpvXaTTeiv edos xPP vaL ^uax^pf-C 0 ' p.eva>v pyelTO UoXvKpdTrjs. Ibid. C. [ 24 . init.] XXXIV. Of the Traditions of the Church. 537 monies retained and ordained by our church are no new¬ fangled ceremonies nor popish superstitions, but that most of them were ordained and used in the primitive church before the pope had forged his superstitions. The provincial church or council of Gerundia therefore ordained, b 44 That every church should use one order in divine service.” The provincial church at Narbonne decreed, c 44 That in the orders of singing, at the end of every psalm, glory be given to the Almighty God, (viz. 4 Glory be to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,’) but in greater psalms, ac¬ cording to their length, shall be made several pauses, and at every pause the glory of the Trinity be sung to the Lord.” And the third council at Toledo, d 44 Whosoever doth not say, 4 Glory be to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost," let him be anathema:” and this is the hymn of glorification or doxology, Y 4 which,” St. Basil saith, 44 they received in his time by tradition from their ancestors, who also followed the scriptures in it."" But the fourth council at Toledo made some alteration in this tradition, ordaining, f44 That in the end of psalms it should not be said, 4 Glory be to the Father,’ but 4 Glory and honour to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,’ the prophet David saying, Give to the Lord glory and honour , &c. This observation therefore,” say they, 44 we give to all ecclesiastical persons, which whosoever shall neglect shall be excommunicated.” And as for what is said still after the doxology, (viz. 44 As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever b Unaquseque ecclesia in officio unum ordinem teneat. Concil. Ge¬ rund. c. i. [tit. p. 1043. vol. II.] c Ut in Psallendi ordinibus per quemque psalmum gloria dicatur omnipotenti Deo : per majores vero psalmos, prout fuerint prolixius, pausationes fiant, et per quamque pausationem gloriaTrinitatis Domino decantetur. Concil. Narbon. can. 2. [p. 492. vol. III.] d Quicunque non dixerit Gloria Patri et Filio et Spiritui Sancto anathema sit. Concil. Tolet. 3. [14. p. 475. vol. III.] e 'Onep eXeyov tolvvv oi narepes rjpoov Kai rjpels Xeyopev on rj 8o£a KOivrj TvarpX Kal via), dio Kal gera rot) viov ttjv bo^oXoyiav npocrdyopev r<5 TTClTpC dXX' OV TOVTO VplV etjcipKel, OTl rcov 7raT€pd)V rj 7 rapadoo-is’ Kcuceivoi yap tco {3ovXr]pan rrjs ypa(j)r)s rjKoXov- Orjo-av. Basil, de Spirit. S. c. 7. [p. 305. vol. II.] f In fine psalmorum, non sicut a quibusdam hucusque, Gloria Patri, sed Gloria et honor Patri dicatur, David propheta dicente Afferte Domino gloriam et honorem, &c. Universis ergo ecclesiasticis hanc observantiam damus; quam quis- quis preeterierit communionis jac- turam habebit. Concil. Tolet. 4. c. [15. p. 584. vol. III.] 538 Of the Traditions of the Church. Art. shall be,”) the Vasionian council doth not only ordain it should be then said, but gives the reason of it: s “ Because,” say they, “ not only in the apostolical seat, but also through all the east, and all Africa and Italy, by reason of the cunning of the heretics, whereby they blasphemously used to say, that 4 the Son of God was not always with the Father, but began to be in time,'’ for this reason, after ‘Glory be to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,’ was said, 4 As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end,’ we also have decreed that it shall be so said in all our churches.” And the same provincial church also ordained, that h “ Kyrie eleeson , or 4 Lord have mercy upon us,’ should be often repeated in their divine service.” The provincial council at Bracarum ordained, 144 That bishops should not salute the people one way and presbyters another, but both one and the same way, saying, The Lord he with you , as it is read in the book of Ruth, and that the people should answer, 4 And with thy spirit, 1 as all the eastern church also retain it, as delivered by tradition from the apo¬ stles themselves, and not as the Priscillian pravity hath changed it.” And the third council at Toledo, that k 44 Ac¬ cording to the form of the oriental churches, the Constantino- politan creed should still be repeated and published before s Quia non solum in sede apo- stolica, sed et per totum orientem et totam Africam vel Italiam, propter haereticorum astutiam, qua Dei Filium non semper cum Patre fuisse sed in tempore coepisse blasphemant, in omnibus clausulis post Gloria Patri, &c. sicut erat in principio, &c. dicatur, etiam et nos universis ecclesiis nostris ita dicendum esse decernimus. Concil. Vasens. [ii.] can. 5. [p. 1106. vol. II.] h Et quia tarn in sede apostolica quam per totas orientis atque Italiee provincias dulcis et nimis salubris consuetudo intromissa est, ut Kyrie eleison frequentius cum grandi af- fectu ac compunctione dicatur, pla- cuit etiam et nobis, ut in omnibus ecclesiis nostris ita consuetudo sancta et ad matutinum et ad missas et ad vesperam Deo propitiante intromit- tatur. Ibid. can. 3. 1 Ut non aliter episcopi, aliter presbyteri populum, sed uno modo salutent, dicentes, Dominus sit vo- biscum ; sicut in libro Ruth legitur; et ut respondeatur a populo, Et cum spiritu tuo; sicut et ab ipsis apo- stolis traditum omnis retinet oriens, et non sicut Priscilliana pravitas per- mutavit. Concil. Bracar. 1. cap. 3. [p. 35°. vol. III.] k Petitione Reccaredi regis con- stituit synodus, ut per omnes eccle- sias Hispaniae et Gallicise, secundum formam ecclesiarum orientalium, concilii Constantinopolitani, hoc est 150 episcoporum symbolum fidei recitetur; et priusquam dominica dicatur oratio, clara voce praedicetur, quo tides vera manifesta sit et testi¬ monium liabeat. Concil. Tolet. 3. can. 2. [p. 479. ibid.] XXXIV. Of the Traditions of the Church. 589 the Lord's Prayer be said, that the true faith may be made manifest and acknowledged." The [fourth] council at Carthage decreed, 1 “ That the deacon should be clothed with white only in the time of offering and reading." And the third council at Tours or¬ dained, that 111 “ laymen, if they did no oftener, at the least three times a year they should communicate, unless any one be by chance hindered by some greater crimes." And the council at Agde names the same three times of the year when every one is to communicate, which our liturgy hath appointed, decreeing, that n “ Secular persons or laymen, that do not communicate at Christmas, Easter, and Whitsuntide, let them not be believed to be catholic or orthodox persons, nor reckoned among such as are catholic." And so did the Elibertine or Eliberitane council too, as cited by Gratian : ° “ Neither is any one numbered among the orthodox who at these three times, viz. Christmas, Easter, and Whitsuntide, doth not communicate." The second synod at Cabilone decreed, that p “ confirmation should not be repeated, nor baptism;" and so the council at Tarraco in Spain, 8 “ We hear say that some of the common people are confirmed by the same bishops twice or thrice, or oftener, the bishops themselves knowing nothing of it; where¬ fore it seemeth good to us, that neither confirmation nor baptism ought to be repeated at all." So that our church is not the first that hath decreed any thing about confirma¬ tion. The council at Laodicea decreed, r that “ Neither wed¬ dings nor birthdays should be kept or celebrated in Lent." 1 Ut diaconus tempore oblationis tantum vel lectionis alba induatur. Concil. Carthag. 4. can. 41. [p. 981. vol. I.] m Ut si non frequentius vel ter laici homines in anno communicent, nisi forte quis majoribus quibuslibet criminibus impediatur. Concil. Tu- ron. 3. c. 50. [p. 1030. vol. IV.] n Seculares qui in natali Domini, pascba, et pentecoste non communi- caverint catholici non credantur, nec inter catholicos habeantur. Concil. Agath. c. 18. [p. 1000. vol. II.] 0 Nec inter catholicos connume- ratur qui in istis viz. temporibus, pascha, pentecoste et natali Domini non communicaverit. Concil. Elib. apud Grat. de consecr. dist. 2. c. Omnis homo, [p.1881. Decret. Grat.] p Unde nobis visum est eandem confirmationem sicut nec baptismum iterari minime debere. Concil. Cabil. 2. c. 27. [p. 1036. vol. IV.] <1 Concil. Tarrac. apud Grat. de consecr. d. 5. c. Dictum est, [p. 1992. Decret. Grat.] r 'Oti ov 8e7 ev TeaaapciKocTTr} ydpovs y) yevedXia imrcXclv. Concil. Laodic. can. 52. [p. 789. vol. I.] 540 Of the Traditions of the Church. Art. XXXIV. And an ancient council here in England, kept under Theo- dorus, ordained, that s “ Easter should be kept in common by all upon the Sunday after the fourteenth moon of the first month.” And another at Oxford decreed, *“ That every bishop shall require an oath from him which shall be pre¬ sented to him, that for that presentation he hath neither promised nor given any thing to him that presented him, nor hath entered any contract for it;” and the same council, u “ That due honour may be given to divine duties, we com¬ mand, that they that minister at the altar have their sur¬ plices on,” as the third council at Carthage before did. The fourth council at Toledo decreed, x “ That the Song of the three children should be constantly sung in divine service.” And thus we see how many even of the very rites and ceremonies, which are still in use amongst us, were long ago ordained by provincial churches met together in council; many more I might heap up to the same purpose, but these may be enough to shew how the provincial or national churches of Christ, in all ages since his incarnation, have still exercised this power in ordaining, altering, and abolish¬ ing ceremonies, which certainly they would never have done, if they had not believed they had power to do it. s Ut sanctum diem paschae in communi omnes servemus dominica post decimam quartam lunam primi mensis. Concil. Anglican, an. [673.] cap. 1. [Wilk. cone. Brit. p. 42. vol. I." t Prsesenti quoque statuto defini- muSj ut episcopus ab eo qui sibi praesentatus fuerit recipiat juramen- tum, quod propter praesentationem illam non promiserit nec dederit ali- quid praesentanti, nec aliquod prop¬ ter hoc pactum inierit. Concil. Oxon. c. [17. p. 119. vol. VII. Cone. Hard.] u Ut honor debitus divinis officiis impendatur, praecipimus ut qui altari ministrant suppeliciis induantur. Ibid. c. [10. p. 118.] x Hymnum quoque trium puero- rum, in quo universa cceli terraeque creatura Deum collaudat, et quem ecclesia catholica per totum orbem diffusa celebrat, quidam sacerdotes in missa dominicorum dierum, et in solennitatibus martyrum canere negligunt. Proinde sanctum con¬ cilium instituit, ut per omnes His- paniae ecclesias vel Galliciae in om¬ nium missarum solennitate idem in publico decantetur, communionem amissuri qui antiquam hujus hymni consuetudinem nostramque defini- tionem excesserint. Concil. Tolet. 4. c. [14. p. 584. vol. III.] ARTICLE XXXV. OF HOMILIES. The second JBooh of Homilies , the several titles whereof we have joined under this article , doth contain a godly and wholesome doctrine , and neces¬ sary for these times, as doth the former JBooh of Homilies , which were set forth in the time of Ed¬ ward the Sixth; and therefore we judge them to he read in churches hy the ministers diligently and dis¬ tinctly , that they may he understanded of the people. OF THE NAMES OF THE HOMILIES. 1. Of the right use of the church. 2. Against peril of idolatry. 3. Of repairing and keeping clean of churches. 4. Of good works : first of fasting. 5. Against gluttony and drunken¬ ness. 6. Against excess of apparel. Of prayer. 8. Of the place and time of prayer. 9. That common prayers and sacra¬ ments ought to be ministered in a known tongue. 10. Of the reverend estimation of God’s word. 11. Of almsdoing. 12. Of the nativity of Christ. 13. Of the passion of Christ. 14. Of the resurrection of Christ. 15. Of the worthy receiving of the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ. 16. Of the gifts of the Holy Ghost. 17. For the rogation days. 18. Of the state of matrimony. 19. Of repentance. 20. Against idleness. 21. Against rebellion. To run through every particular homily here mentioned, and to confirm every particular expression therein contained, would not only swell this into many of the like volumes, but take up more time also than either I or any one else (that hath no more time than one age to live) can have to do it in; 542 Of Homilies. Art. and when all is done it would still be but a superfluous and needless work too; for it is not so much the homilies them¬ selves that are to be read, as the reading of these homilies in public assemblies, that is the thing carped at; so that the principal thing here to be confirmed is, that it is lawful even in public meetings, where the people of God are assembled to perform service and worship to him, to read other books, dis¬ courses, sermons, or homilies, (for a homily and a sermon is all one,) than what is expressly and word for word con¬ tained in the holy scriptures. And to prove this from scrip¬ ture, I might instance in the words of St. Paul to the Colos- sians, And when this epistle is read amongst you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans, a and that ye also read the epistle from Laodicea , Coloss. iv. 16. Here we see St. Paul charges the Colossians to read the epistle from Lao¬ dicea ; what epistle ? not any of the epistle of St. Paul’s to the Laodiceans, but rather the epistle of the Laodiceans to St. Paul. b “ Some,” saith Theodoret, “ have thought that St. Paul also wrote to the Laodiceans, and therefore they pro¬ duce also a feigned epistle; but St. Paul doth not say the epistle which was to the Laodiceans, but that which was from Laodicea: for they had written concerning certain things to him.” And St. Chrysostom, c “ Some say that he doth not understand any epistle of St. Paul sent to them, but one sent a The vulgar Latin renders it here, Et earn quae Laodicensium est vos quoque legatis, whereas the Greek hath it expressly, Kal rr)v Aa.odi.K6 las tva Kal v fie is amyrcore, and therefore the Syriac v_»aio cnojpo ^ AoAoZ.j> oAj|, i* e< And that which was writ - ten from, Laodicea do you also read , which being the true and genuine exposition of the words, it is not any epistle of St. Paul written to the Laodiceans that can be here under¬ stood; nor indeed, though we should admit of the vulgar Latin to give us the right translation of the words, can there be any such consequence, but rather the quite contrary, drawn from them. For suppose it be Lao¬ dicensium epistola, that doth not imply St. Paul’s Epistle to them, but rather the Laodiceans’ to him, and therefore it is called the Laodi¬ ceans’, not St. Paul’s Epistle. b Quidam existimant ipsum etiam scripsisse ad Laodicenses: itaque fictam etiam epistolam proferunt. Divinus autem apostolus non dixit earn quae est ad Laodicenses, sed earn quae est a Laodicaea; illi enim de aliquibus rebus ad ilium scripse- rant. Theodoret. in loc. [p. 363. vol. c Tu/es \eyovwiv otl ovfi tt]v Ilau- \ov 7 rpds avrovs anecrTaXpeviju, aXXa TTjv nap avroiv IlatlAw’ ov yap eine rr)v rrpos A aodiKeas aXXa rrjv e,< Aao- diKelas (j^crl. Chrysost. in Colos. horn. 12. [p. 152. vol. IV.] XXXV. Of Homilies. 543 from them to St. Paul: for he did not say the epistle writ¬ ten to the Laodiceans, but he said, that written from Lao- dicea." And therefore St. Justinian, d “ The opinion of Chry¬ sostom and Theodoret seems to me to be the nearest the truth, even that not St. Paul's epistle to the Laodiceans, but rather the Laodiceans' epistle to St. Paul is here signified, which the Greek words plainly shew." So that here the Holy Ghost doth not only permit them, but command them to read a discourse which was not any part of the canonical scriptures. For though perhaps it might be some epistle written by St. Paul from Laodicea, yet it is plain, that it is not any part of the holy scriptures, unless we hold that some part of the holy scriptures is lost; which no wise man will; and therefore we cannot but from hence grant it to be lawful, even in the church, to read some things which are no part of the canon of scriptures. And if we call to mind the practice of the primitive church, we shall find that even then many things were read in the church besides canonical scriptures, yea, and ordered to be read by councils. The [third] council of Carthage decreed indeed, e “ That nothing should be read in the church besides the canonical scripture under the name of holy scriptures but in decreeing that, they imply that something else may be read in the church, though not under the name of holy scrip¬ tures ; and therefore themselves add too presently, f “ The passions of the martyrs may also be read when their anniver¬ sary days are celebrated." And the council at Vasiona or Vasens, s a This also pleaseth us, for the edification of all d Chrysostomi el Theodoreti sen- tentia mihi vero propinquior visa est. Non Pauli epistolam ad Lao- dicenses, sed contra potius Laodi- censium ad Paulum significari quod Graeca verba aperte indicant. Jus¬ tinian. in loc. [p. 363. vol. II.] e Item placuit, ut praeter scriptu- ras canonicas, nihil in ecclesia lega- tur sub nomine divinarum scriptu- rarum. Concil. Carthag. 3. c. 47. [p. 968. vol. I. Cone. Hard.] f Liceat etiam legi passiones mar- tyrum, cum anniversarii dies eorum celebrantur. Ibid. s Hoc etiam pro aedificatione omnium ecclesiarum et pro utilitate totius populi nobis placuit, ut non solum in civitatibus, sed etiam in omnibus parochiis verbum faciendi daremus presbyteris potestatem; ita ut si presbyter, aliqua infirmitate prohibente, per seipsum non potue- rit praedicare, sanctorum patrum 544 Of Homilies. Art. churches and the profit of all people, that we give power to priests to preach the word, not only in cities, but in all parishes. So that if the priest, some infirmity hindering him, cannot preach himself, the homilies of the holy fathers be read or recited by the deacons." And so the council at Rhemes ordained, h “ That bishops study to preach, according to the property of the language, the sermons and homilies of the holy fathers, so that all may understand them." So that it is no new thing for homilies to be ordained to be read in churches. And if we still ascend higher, we shall find that presently after our Saviour's time there were several things read in the churches besides canonical scripture; especially there are three writings which I find then to be read in pub¬ lic, Hernias's Pastor, Polycarp's Epistle to the Philippians, and Clemens's Epistle to the Corinthians. First for Hermas’s Pastor, of which Eusebius Caesariensis saith, J “ But because the same apostle, at the end of his Epistle to the Romans, makes mention with others of one Hernias also, whose the book of the Pastor they say is, we must know that that also is gainsaid by some by whom it is not put amongst the acknowledged books of the scriptures, yet by others it is judged very necessary, especially for such as are to be instructed in the first elements; whereupon we know that it is read publicly in the churches." And St. Jerome, k “ Hernias, of whom the apostle Paul writing to the Romans makes mention, saying, Salute Asyncritus , Phlegon , homiliae a diaconibus recitentur. Concil. Vasens. 2. can. 2. [p. 1105. vol. II.] h Ut episcopi sermones et homi- lias sanctorum patrum, sicut omnes intelligere possent, secundum pro- prietatem linguae praedicare stude- ant. Concil. Rhem. [2.] c. 15. [p. 1019. vol. IV.] i ’E7ret be 6 dnocrroXos iv rais in\ reXei npocrpqcrecri Trjs 7 rpo? 'P copaiovs, pvrjpqv TceTTOLT)Tcu pera twv aXXcov Kal 'Eppa, ov (f)acrlv vTrcipxetv to tov 7 rot- pevos (3i(3\loi>, Icrreov mj kcil tovto npos p.ev tlvcov avTiXeXeKTCu, bi ovs ovk iv opoXoyovpivois reQelr), vf eripcov be dvayKcuorarov ois paXurra aroix^ixTecos elerayoayiKrjS KeicpiTcu’ odev rjbrj kcil iv i«XT]trials ’Icrpev avro bebrjpomevpevov. Euseb. hist. 1 . 3. c. 3. k Hermas, cujus apostolus Pau- lus ad Romanos scribens meminit, Salutate Asyncritum, Phlegonem, Hermam, Patrobum, Hermen et qui cum eis fratres sunt. Asserunt au- torem esse libri qui appellatur Pa¬ stor, et apud quasdam Graeciae ec- clesias etiam publice legitur. Hieron. in catalog, scriptor. eccles. [p. 831. vol. II.] XXXV. Of Homilies. 545 Hernias, Patrobas , Hermes , the brethren which are with them , (Rom. xvi. 14.) they say he was the author of the book which is called the Pastor, and in some churches of Greece it is read publiclyand therefore saith Ruffinus, 1 “ Of that order (viz. of ecclesiastical, not canonical books) is the book of Tobit and Judith, and the books of the Maccabees, but in the New Testament the book which is called the book of the Pastor, or Hermas; all which they (the ancient Fathers) would have to be read in the churches, but not produced to confirm the authority of faith out of them.” So that it is manifest that this book, though not canonical scripture, was read publicly in the primitive churches. The next is Polycarp's Epistle to the Philippians, of which Irenaeus saith, m “ it was written accurately, out of which such as will and mind their salvation may learn the character of his faith and the preaching of truth.” And St. Jerome, speak¬ ing of Polycarp, saith, n “ He wrote to the Philippians a very useful epistle, which to this day is read in the Asian assem¬ blies.” The last is Clemens's Epistle to the Corinthians, con¬ cerning which St. Jerome saith, ° “ Clemens wrote from the church of Rome to that at Corinth a very useful epistle, which also in some places is publicly read, which seems to me to agree with the character of that epistle which goes under the name of Paul to the Hebrews.” And Eusebius saith of this epistle, P “ It is a great and an admirable one, which he wrote 1 Ejusdem ordinis est libellus Tobiae et Judeth et Maccabaeorum libri: in Novo vero Testamento li¬ bellus, qui dicitur Pastoris sive Her¬ mans, &c.; quae omnia legi quidem in ecclesiis voluerunt, non tamen proferri ad autoritatem ex his fidei confirmandam. Ruffin, in expos, symb. [p. 26.] m J/ Ecrn §e kcll eTTicrToXr) IIoAu- Kapnov TTpos ^iXinniovs yeypappevrj iKavcorarr]’ f]S aal t'ov x a P aKT VP a rrjs TTLcrreois avrov Kai to Kppvypa rrjs dXrjdeias, ol (3ovXop,evoi aa'i cfipov- tl^ovtss Ttjs eavrow crcoTrjp'ias bvvav- tcu padelv. Euseb. hist. 1 . 4. c. [14.] ex Iren. adv. haeres. 1 . 3. c. 3. [4.] n Scripsit ad Philippenses valde utilem epistolam, quae usque hodie in Asiae conventu legitur. Hieron. in catal. scrip, eccles. [p. 843. vol. H] 0 Clemens scripsit ex persona Romanorum ad ecclesiam Corinthi- orum valde utilem epistolam, quae et in nonnullis locis publice legitur, quae mihi videtur characteri episto- lae, quae sub Pauli nomine ad He- braeos fertur, convenire. Ibid. [p. 8 39-] , , a c P MeydA?7 Se kgu vavpacna, f]v cos a7rd rrjs ‘Vcopalcov eKKXpcrias rfj Kopiv- Slcov bieTvncocraTO, crracrecos rijiuKade Kara t>)v Kopivdov yevopevrjs. T civtijv de koX ev nXelarais eKKXrjataLs eVri to v kolvov 8e8r]p.0(rLevpevrjv ttoXcu re K.a\ kciO' j )pds civTOvs eyvcoptv. Euseb. hist. 1. 3. c. [16.] BEVERIDGE. N 11 546 Of Homilies. Art. XXXV. from the church of the Romans to that of the Corinthians, there being a sedition then at Corinth. And this epistle we know to be read publicly both long ago and also in our time.” And so we have three discourses besure, like so many homi¬ lies, read publicly in the primitive churches; and therefore we do not recede from them in decreeing some to be read in ours. ARTICLE XXXVI. OF CONSECRATION OF BISHOPS AND MINISTERS. The booh of consecration of archbishops and bishops , and ordering of priests and deacons , lately set forth in the time of Edward the Sixth , and con- firmed at the same time by authority of parliament, doth contain all things necessary to such conse¬ cration and ordering: neither hath it any thing that of itself is superstitious or ungodly. And therefore whosoever are consecrated or ordered according to the rites of that booh , since the second year of the aforenamed hing Edward unto this time , or here¬ after shall be consecrated or ordered according to the same rites; we decree all such to be rightly , orderly , and lawfully consecrated and ordered. T HOUGH this article when first composed had reference to one book, and by the late act for uniformity to another, yet in both it hath reference but to one and the same manner of consecration of archbishops and bishops, and ordering of priests and deacons; for though there be some expressions inserted into the latter, which were not in the former book, yet they both agree in that which is the form and substance of consecration and ordination; both of them appointing that in the conse¬ cration of a bishop, the archbishop and bishops present shall lay their hands upon his head; that in the ordering of priests, the bishop and priests present shall lay their hands severally upon the head of every one that receiveth the order of priest¬ hood ; and that in the ordering of deacons, the bishop only 548 Of Consecration of Art. shall lay his hands severally upon the head of every one of them: and so that the bishops shall be consecrated by the archbishop of the province or metropolitan, other bishops being present and laying on their hands with him; priests by the bishop of the diocese, or some other bishop appointed by him, other priests being present and laying on their hands too with him; deacons by the bishop only : in which con¬ sisted the form and substance of all their ordinations. And therefore also in the speaking to them I need do no more than shew that the several orders of bishops, priests, and deacons are to be consecrated and ordered according to that form and manner; even that a bishop be consecrated by the archbishop of the province, (or some other bishop appointed by lawful authority,) the other bishops there present joining with him in laying on of hands; that a priest be ordered by a bishop, other priests there present and laying on their hands too; and that a deacon be ordered by the bishop only. And for the proof of this I shall refer myself wholly to the judgment of the primitive church ; who, having the happiness to live nearer the apostles’ times than we do, were better acquainted with the apostles’ practice in these things than we. And for my own part I dare not but look upon the practice of the primitive church in this case to be lawful in itself and binding unto others. For if we once suppose that the pri¬ mitive church generally erred in their ordination of ministers, then we must grant also that there hath been never a lawful ministry since, the lawfulness of their ministry depending principally, yea only, upon the lawfulness of their ordination; and if there were no lawful ministers to ordain them,, they who were ordained could not be lawful ministers ; and if there be no lawful ministry, there cannot be any true church, because the word is not lawfully preached nor the sacraments lawfully administered in it. And therefore we must needs grant that in this besure, though in nothing else, the general practice of the primitive church must be allowed of. Now to find out the general practice of the primitive church in this case we must not consult particular persons, but rather universal and provincial councils, wherein whole XXXVI. 549 Bishops and Ministers. churches met together. The practice and judgment of parti¬ cular persons cannot be said to be the practice and judgment of the whole church; but what whole councils decreed or did cannot be looked upon but as the practice and judgment, not of many particular persons only, but of the church itself. First therefore for the consecration of bishops. The ancient council at Antioch put forth this decree, a “Let not a bishop be ordained without the assembly and presence of the metropolitan of the province. And he being present, it is very convenient that all his fellow bishops in the province be present with him, and it is fitting that the metropolitan should by his letter call them together. And if they can all meet, it is better. But if that be difficult, many of them should how¬ soever be present, or else give in their suffrages by their letters; and so the constitution be made with the presence and suffrage of many of them. But if it be done otherwise than is here decreed, let the ordination be invalid, or of no force."" The first council at Nice: b “ But this is altogether manifest, that if any one be made a bishop without the sen¬ tence of the metropolitan, this great council decrees that such a one ought not to be a bishop." 1 And so the council at Laodicea determined, c “that bishops be consecrated by the judgment of the metropolitan and bishops there about, unto ecclesiastical government, being before long examined in the matter of their faith and polity, or dispensation of right reason;" 1 d “which canon,"" as Balsamon saith, “forbids bishops to be a 'EttIctkotvov pi) x el P OTO velcrOai avvodov kcu napovcrlas rov iv rrj firjTponoXei rrjs eVap^ias’ tovtov 8e Tvapovros i^dnavTOS jSeXTiov pev crvvelvai avrco ndvras rovs iv rrj inapxta crvXXeiTovpyovs, kcu TrpocrrjKei 8i €7ri(TToXrjs tov iv rrj prjTpoivdXei crvyKaXelv, /cat el pev anavTolev oi navres, fiiXnov' el 8e Bvaxepes eirj tovto, tovs ye nXelovs i^anavTos nctp- elvai del, r) 8ia ypapparcov 6po\fn/- v. Can. apost. I. [vol. I. ibid.] h Ut episcopus minus quam a tribus episcopis non ordinetur. Con¬ cil. Hippon. [39. p. 972. ibid.] * De his qui usurpant sibi quod soli debeant episcopum ordinare; placuit ut nullus hoc sibi prsesumat, nisi assumptis secum aliis septem episcopis. Si tamen non potuerint septem, sine tribus fratribus non audeant ordinare. Concil. Arelat. 1. can. 20. [p. 266. ibid.] j Concil. Rhegiens. c. 1, 2. [p. 1748. ibid.] k Episcopus cum ordinatur, duo episcopi ponant et teneant evange- liorum codicem super caput et ver- ticem ejus, et uno super eum fun- dente benedictionem, reliqui omnes episcopi, qui adsunt, manibus suis caput ejus tangant. Concil. Car- thag. 4. c. 2. [p.979. ibid.] 551 XXXVI. Bishops and Ministers. consecrating bishops now in use amongst us, and decreed in this article. And as for the second, viz. the ordering of priests, the pratice of the primitive church may be seen also in these par¬ ticulars : first, the apostolical canons (though perhaps not apostolical, yet besure very ancient) say, 144 Let a priest be ordained by one bishop, and so a deacon and other clergymen.” In the fourth [third] council at Carthage m Aurelius said, 44 There may be one bishop by whom, through the permission of God, many priests may be ordained,or, as the Greek translation hath it, n 44 By the permission of God one bishop may ordain many priests.” The council at Antioch: 0 44 A bishop may also ordain priests and deacons, and handle all things with judgment, but undertake to do nothing further, without the bishop of the metropolis, nor he without the sentence of the others.” Hence is that of the council at Chalcedon: P 44 If any bishop shall for money make ordination, or sell that grace which cannot be sold, or for money ordain any bishop, suffragan, priest, or deacon, he that is convinced of doing this, let him be in danger of losing his own degree;” plainly implying that it was he only that ordained him. The council of Nice: 44 If any (of the Paulianists) was in ancient time in the clergy, if they appear unreprovable, being baptized again, let them be ordained by a bishop of the catholic church.” It was by a 1 n peorfivTepos vtto evbs enuTKOTrov XfipoTovelcrOco, k ai diaKovos, ko! Aowrol kXtjpikoI. Can. apost. 2. [ibid.] m Aurelius episcopus dixit: Sed episcopus unus esse potest; per quern, dignatione divina, presbyteri multi constitui possunt. Concil. Carthag. 4 . [3.] c. 45 . [p. 967. ibid.] n Kara crvy\6iprj(rLV Oeov dvvarai 6 eis inicTKOTVos noXXovs \eiporovelv Tvpeafivrepovs. Balsam, in synod. Carthag. p. [588. vol. I. Bever. synod.] 0 '$2? Kcu xeipoTOvelv npecrfivTepovs no! diaxovovs, kcu pera Kp'tcrecos eKacrra 8ia.Xapfia.veiv, nepairepco 8e prjbev npaTTciv €7rL^eipelv Si^a T °v M" rponoXecos emcrKoirov, pt]6i avrov avev Ttjs t<6v Xonrcov yvcbprjs. Concil, An¬ tioch. can. 9. [p. 597. vol. I. Cone, Hard.] P Ei ns €7rl(TK07ros eVl XPVf xacrL Xet-poTovlav TroirjcraTO, K-ai els TTpauLV Kcirayayoi rrjv anparov x ( *P LV > Kal - X^ipoTourjfroi enl xP^IP a(TLV c7ria7C07T0V, rj x a) P €Tr ^ (TKOTroi ''> V 'n'pecrfivTepov, rj 816.KOVOV, &C. 6 TOVTO e 7 UX (l P^O' a ^f eXeyx^els Kivdvveverco, rrepl tov ol- Kelov fia.6p.6v. Concil. Chalced. can. 2. [p. 601. vol. II. ibid.] Q Ei 8e reves ra> rrapeXrjXvBuri Xpovcp ev to) KXrjpco e^rjTaaOrjcrav, el pev apepivTOi Kal dveTTiXrjirTOL (pavelev, dvafiairricrOevTes ^eiporoi/eidcoa’av vno tov Tijs KadoXiKrjs eKKXijcrtas enuTKo- 7 tov. Concil. Nicen. can. 19. [p. 331. vol. I. ibid.] 552 Of Consecration of Art. bishop they were to be ordained; and therefore, saith the second council at Seville, r “A bishop can alone of himself give honour to priests and ministers, but he cannot take it away alone.” Nay, so strict was the primitive church in having priests ordained by bishops only, that in the time of ordination, though the bishop was present and did some things, yet unless he did all he ought to do, the person was not looked upon as ordained, as we see in the aforesaid council at Seville: s “ It is told us,” say they, “ concerning some of the clergy, whereof whilst one should be ordained to the priesthood, and two to the ministry of the Levites, the bishop, being troubled with sore eyes, is reported to have put his hand upon them only, and that a certain priest, contrary to the ecclesiastical order, gave the blessing to them, who, though if he was yet alive, might after accusation be condemned for so great bold¬ ness, yet seeing he being left to divine trial cannot be accused by human judgment, these that are alive, let them lose the degree of priesthood, or of the Levitical order, which they got perversely.” And thus in the primitive church if any one was convinced not to have been ordained by a bishop, he was looked upon as a layman, be he ordained by whom he would else; and therefore the second general council held at Constantinople decreed, 1 “ concerning Maximus the Cynic, and that disturbance that was made at Constantinople by him, that Maximus neither was nor is a bishop, neither are any of these that were ordained by him in any degree of the r Episcopus enim sacerdotibus et ministris solus honorem dare potest, auferre solus non potest. Concil. Hispal. 2. c. 6. [p. 559. vol. III. ibid.] s Relatum est nobis de quibusdam clericis quorumdam unus ad presby- terium, duo ad Levitarum ministe- rium sacrarentur, episcopus oculo- rum dolore detentus, fertur manus suas super eos tantum imposuisse, et presbyter quidam illis contra ec- clesiasticum ordinem benedictionem dedisse, qui licet propter tantam audaciam poterat accusatus damnari si adhuc viveret, sed quia jam ille examini divino relictus, humano ju- dicio accusari non potest, hi qui supersunt gradum sacerdotii, vel Levitici ordinis, quem perverse ad- epti sunt, amittant. Ibid. can. 5. t Ilept M a^ifiov rov K vvucov kcu rrjs kcit avrov dramas rrjs ev Kcov- aravrivovnoXei ycvopevrjs, ware prjre M a^ifiov eniaKonov p yeveaOai rj et- vai, prjre rovs Trap avrov ^eiporovrj- devras ev oiw drjnore (3a8p,q> KXrjpov, ndvrcov Ka\ ra>v 7rep\ avrov kol toov nap ’ avrov yevop,evcov aKvpooBevroiv. Concil. Constantinop. 1. can. 4. [p. 809. vol. I. ibid.] XXXVI. Bishops and Ministers. 553 clergy, all things that were done for him or by him being disannulled/’ Having once pronounced Maximus no bishop, they presently declare all ordained by him to be laymen. And there was a remarkable passage bo this purpose also in the council of Alexandria; for it being objected by the Arians against Athanasius, amongst other things, that one Ma¬ carius, a deacon of his, had broken a sacramental cup, the synod at Alexandria examined this amongst the other things that were laid to his charge, and find that at the time and place where his adversaries said the fact was done, u there was no ecclesiastical person or clergyman there, and by con¬ sequence no sacramental cup. But it was said that Ischyras was there. “ But Ischyras,” say they, x “ how came Ischyras to be a priest ? who ordained him ? to wit Coluthus ? For that is all they can say. But that Coluthus was but a priest him¬ self when he died, and all his imposition of hands made void, and all that were ordained by him in the schism are no more than laymen, and are so admitted to the sacrament, is evi¬ dent, so that no one doubts of it. And how then shall a private person, dwelling in a private house, be believed to have a mystical or sacramental cup T” So that Ischyras, though ordained, yet being ordained by one that was himself no more than a priest, no bishop, he is looked upon as no priest, but a layman, a private person, and that not only by the council at Alexandria, but by another at Sardice, “ who,” say y they, “ gave the reward of calumny unto Ischyras, calling him bishop who was not so much as a priest.” And thus we see how in the primitive church it was bishops only that ordained priests, and they were no priests who were not ordained by u Kat ravra pev ov^ on s yap; onov pr/re tottos kv~ pcaKrjs, prjre rls Aet rr]S iKKkrjcrias, aXXa p.T)T€ 6 KGlpOS TCOV pVCTTTjpLCOV Y]V. Concil. Alexandr. apud Athanas. in apol. [p. 134. vol. I.] x II 66ev ovv TrpecrftvTtpos’lo'xvpas; t'lvos KaracTTrjaavTos; apa K o\ovdov; tovto yap \oity6v. ’AXX’ otl K oXovdos npeafivrepos ereXevTrjo-e, Kal ndcra \('ip avTOV ycyovev aKvpos, ko'i navres oi Trap avrov Karaaradevres iv rat crx^pari XatKot yeyovacri, Kal ovtcos crvvdyovrai, 8rj\ov, Kal ovdevl Kade- CTTTjKev dp(plf3aWov. IIco? ovv ISlcottjs avOpWTTOS, Kal OLKLCTKOV OLKCOV IdlOOTI.- kov, TTOTrjpiov epvariKov 7riarev~ 6eir) ; ibid. y ’A peXei ttjs o-vKocfiavrlas avrrjs piadov tco ’icrxvpa deScoKacriv emaKO- 7rov ovopa, tco pr)8e TTpecr^vrepco rvy- Xavovri. Concil. Sardic. apud Theo- doret. hist, eccles. 1. 2. c. [6. p. 592. vol. III.] 554 Of Consecration of Art. bishops, insomuch that z St. Chrysostome, yea, and a St. Jerome himself too, could not but say that ordination, though nothing else, was peculiar to bishops; so that though presbyters should be thought to be equal to bishops in other things, yet in this business of ordination bishops must needs be acknow¬ ledged to be above them. And if we search into the manner of this their episcopal ordination, Theophilus Alexandrinus saith, b “ Concerning those that are to be ordained, this shall be the form or manner, that all the priesthood shall consent and choose, and then the bishop shall examine him, or the priesthood assenting to him, he shall ordain in the middle of the church, the people being present, and the bishop asking if the people also can witness for him; but let not ordination be done pri¬ vately.” And the fourth council of Carthage plainly, c “ When a priest is ordained, the bishop blessing him, and holding his hand upon his head, let all the priests also which are present hold their hands by the hand of the bishop upon his head.” So exactly doth our form and manner of ordering priests answer that of the primitive church. And lastly, for the ordering of deacons, d which the [fourth] council at Arles saith should not be ordained before twenty- five years old, besides that of the apostolical canons before cited, “ Let a priest be ordered by one bishop, and so a z T l brjTvore; on ov 7 to\v to picrov avroiv (npeaftvTepcov) Kal truer kottwv. Kat yap rt avrol bibacrKaXiav elcrlv dvabebeyptvoi, Kal Trpocrraeriav rr/s €KK\T]crlas. Kat a rrep\ tniaKOTvaiv elne, ravra teat npecrfivTipois appoT- reC rfj yap %eipOTOvia povrj vrrep- l3e(3r)KaaL, k at tovto povov boKovcn nXeoveKTelv tovs TrpecrftvTepovs. Chry- sost. in i Tim. hom. n. init. [p. 289. vol. IV.] a Quid facit, excepta ordinatione, episcopus quod presbyter non faciat ? Hieron. ad Evagrium, [ep. 146. p. 1076. vol. I.] b Ilept tvelv Kal aipeiaSai, Kal rore tov iTciaKOTrov boKipafciv rj Kal crvvaivovvTOs avTqi tov upaniov XeLpOTOvelv tv pierrj Tjj tKKXrjo-la rra- povTos tov Xaov Kal 7rpoo-(pa>vovvTos tov tmaKorrov ft Kal 6 Xaos dvvaTai avTco papTvpelv" ^etporoi/ta be Xa~ Opaicos pr/ yivecrda). Theoph. Alex- andr. can. 6. [p. 172. vol. II. Bever. synod.] c Presbyter cum ordinatur epi- scopo eum benedicente et manum super caput ejus tenente, etiam om- nes presbyteri qui prsesentes sunt manus suas juxta manus episcopi super caput illius teneant. Concil. Cartbag. 4. can. 3. [p. 979. vol. I. Cone. Hard.] d Ut diaconus ante 25 annos, et sacerdos ante 30 non ordinetur. Concil. Arel. [4.] c. 1. [tit. p. 1069. vol. II. ibid.] XXXVI. Bishops and Ministers. 555 deacon, and others also of the clergy.” And what else makes to this purpose in the foregoing discourse, I shall only add that of the fourth council at Carthage, e “ When a deacon is ordained, let the bishop only that blesseth him put his hand upon his head, because he is not ordained to the priesthood, but only to the ministry;” which is the very thing which the book this article hath reference unto prescribes. All which things being put together, unless we will say there was no lawful ministry in the primitive church, and by consequence none now, (for there is no lawful ministry but what is law¬ fully ordained, and the ministry of the primitive church, if it was not lawfully ordained, neither could it lawfully ordain others, and so all the ministry ever since, being unlawfully ordained, was no lawful ministry,) I say, unless we grant so grand an absurdity, we must needs subscribe to this article. e Diaconus cum ordinatur, solus ad sacerdotium sed ad ministerium episcopus qui eum benedicit manum consecratur. Concil. Carthag. 4 . c. 4 . super caput illius ponat, quia non [p. 979. ibid.] ARTICLE XXXVII. OF THE CIVIL MAGISTRATE. The king's majesty hath the chief power in this realm of England and other his dominions, unto whom the chief government of all estates of this realm, whether they he ecclesiastical or civil, in all causes doth appertain, and is not, nor ought to he , subject to any foreign jurisdiction. Where we attribute to the king's majesty the chief government, by which titles we understand the minds of some slanderous folks to he offended; we give not to our princes the ministering either of God's word or of the sacra - meats, the which thing the Injunctions also lately set forth by Elizabeth our queen do most plainly testify; but that only prerogative which we see to have been given always to all godly princes in holy scriptures by God himself; that is, that they should rule all states and degrees committed to their charge by God, whether they be ecclesiastical or temporal, and restrain with the civil sword the stubborn and evil-doers . I N these words we have the power of the civil magistrate asserted, and the assertion of that power explained. For here it is first asserted that the king’s majesty hath the chief government of all estates in this and the other of his dominions, both ecclesiastical and civil. And then it is added, that the power of the administering of God’s word or sacraments is not bv this assertion granted to the king, blit that his power Art. XXXVII. Of the Civil Magistrate. 557 is still to keep itself within the limits of a civil power, though it may extend itself to ecclesiastical persons or causes. But for the better opening and confirming of this we must call to mind how the most high God, the supreme Governor of all churches and states in the world, hath been pleased, for the more orderly government of both, to settle a distinct power in each, the power of the keys in the church, and the power of the sword in the state, answerable to the two essential parts of man, his soul and his body; for the power of the keys committed to the church, that reacheth to the soul only, not to the body; and the power of the sword com¬ mitted to the civil magistrate, that reacheth to the body only, not to the soul; but both together they have influence both upon the soul and body, or outward man. And though both these powers be united in God, the fountain of all power, yet when derived from Him they are still separated from one another, so that they are not seated together in one and the same person ; but the civil magistrate, to whom the power of the sword is granted, to him is the power of the keys denied; and the church, to which the power of the keys is granted, to it is the power of the sword denied. And therefore was Peter, who had the power of keys, commanded to put up his sword, Matt. xxvi. 52, and Uzziah, who had the power of the sword, punished for using the keys, 2 Chron. xxvi.; so that the priest hath no power to execute any part of the king’s office, neither hath the king any power to execute any part of the priest’s office; but these being two distinct offices and ordinances appointed by God, he that hath the keys must use them, not the sword, and he that hath the sword must use it, and not the keys. And hence it is that when the power of the civil magistrate was asserted to extend itself to ecclesiastical persons and causes, as well as civil, it is forthwith added, Where we at¬ tribute to the king's majesty the chief government , (by which titles we understand the minds of some slanderous folks to be offended ,) we give not to our princes the ministering either of God's word or of the sacraments , the which thing the Injunctions also lately set forth by Elizabeth our queen do most plainly testify. In which words we being referred to the queen's Injunctions for the 558 Of the Civil Magistrate. Art. further explication of this particular, we must consider what is there written to this purpose; and amongst other things we find it there said, a “ And further, her majesty forbiddeth all manner of her subjects to give ear or credit to such perverse and malicious persons, which most sinisterly and maliciously labour to notify to her loving subjects, how, by the words of the same oath, (viz. of supremacy,) it may be collected, the kings or queens of this realm, possessors of the crown, may challenge authority and power of ministry of divine offices in the church, wherein her said subjects are much abused by such evil disposed persons. For certainly her majesty neither doth nor ever will challenge any other authority than that was challenged and lately used by the said noble kings of famous memory, king Henry the Eighth and king Edward the Sixth, which is and was of ancient time due to the imperial crown of this realm, that is, under God to have the sovereignty and rule over all persons born within these her realms, dominions, and countries, of what estate, either ec¬ clesiastical or temporal, soever they be, so as no other foreign power shall or ought to have any superiority over them.'” And for the confirmation of this sense put upon the oath of supremacy, and so the king’s sovereignty, there was a proviso also established by act of parliament to this purpose : b u Pro¬ vided also that the oath expressed in the same act made in the first year shall be taken and expounded in such form as is set forth in an admonition annexed to the queen’s majesty’s Injunctions, published in the first year of her majesty’s reign; that is to say, to confess and acknowledge in her majesty, her heirs and successors, none other authority than that was challenged and lately used by the noble king Henry the Eighth and king Edward the Sixth, as in the said admonition may more plainly appear.” By which we may see how vain and groundless the scandal is which is usually cast upon the oath of supremacy, as if we there acknowledged the king to have the keys as well as the sword committed to him, and that he might administer the word and sacraments in spiritual, as well as justice and judgment in secular affairs; a In the admonition annexed to queen Elizabeth’s Injunctions, [p. 83. Sparrow’s coll.] b Stat. of 5 Elizab. cap. 1. XXXVII. Of the Civil Magistrate. 559 whereas the same power that asserted the king's supremacy hath still denied it to extend to the exercise of any spiritual function. But though the power of the sword and that of the keys be not seated in one and the same subject, yet it doth not follow but they may be exercised upon one and the same object, so that the selfsame person, yea, for one and the same crime, may be punished by both powers; for though they be two distinct powers, yet each of them is to be custos utrius- que tabulae , to look to the observance and punish the breach of both tables, but still keeping themselves within their own limits: as for example, theft, treason, murder, are breaches of the second table, and therefore to be punished by the civil magistrate ; yet the persons guilty of such crimes may be punished by the church also, even excommunicated for them. So, on the other side, blasphemy, heresy, and idolatry, are breaches of the first table, and so to be punished immediately by the church; yet they may, yea, and ought to be punished by the civil magistrate too ; neither is there any other power whereby a heretic or blasphemer can be put to death, but only by the power of the sword : and therefore it must needs be granted, that as the breaches of the second table may be punished by the power of the keys as well as by the power of the sword, c so may the breaches of the first table be punished by the power of the sword as well as by the power of the keys; and if so, the power of the civil magistrate must needs reach to spiritual or ecclesiastical, as well as secular or temporal causes; for all the first table consists of nothing else. And this, the punishing with the civil sword all manner of persons guilty of ecclesiastical as well as secular crimes, seems to be the prerogative here principally given to the c Quomodo ergo reges Domino serviunt in timore nisi ea quse contra jussa Domini fiunt religiosa severitate prohibendo, atque plec- tendo ? Aliter enim servit quia homo est, aliter quia etiam rex est: quia homo est, ei servit vivendo fideliter, quia vero etiam rex est, servit leges justa prsecipientes et contraria prohibentes convenienti vigore sanciendo. Sicut servivit Hezechias lucos et templa idolorum et ilia excelsa quse contra prsecepta Dei fuerant extructa destruendo, sicut servivit Jozias talia et ipse faciendo, sicut servivit rex Ninivi- tarum universam civitatem ad [pla- candum Dominum compellendo. Aug. epist. ad Bonifac. [185. 19. vol. I.] 560 Of the Civil Magistrate. Art. king’s majesty in this article, as appears in these words : But we give to our princes only that prerogative , Sfc. that they should rule all states and degrees committed to their charge by God f whether they be ecclesiastical or temporal , and restrain with the civil sword the stubborn and evil-doers: so that the supremacy that is here given him is, that he may punish all manner of persons for all manner of crimes, whether ecclesiastical or temporal, with the civil sword. And seeing all manner of persons and causes are thus to be subject to him and punishable by him, it necessarily follows that he hath power and authority over them, whether ec¬ clesiastical or civil. So that he may command ecclesiastical as well as civil persons to give obedience to ecclesiastical as well as civil laws, yea, and punish them for their disobedience. What disorders are brought into the church, he may and ought to reform them; what needless or dangerous contro¬ versies arise in the church, he may and ought to still them; as also he may and ought to see that all things be done decently and in order; and to that end may, either of himself or by the advice of a council, prescribe rules and canons to be observed in the external order of divine worship; so that he may call a council when he pleaseth, dismiss it when he pleaseth, and confirm their decrees and constitutions so far as himself pleaseth; so that nothing they prescribe is obligatory under any temporal penalty without his consent, though what he prescribes is obligatory without their consent. And thus king James, who was a person well acquainted with the extent of his own power: d The king’s supremacy, saith he, implies a power to command 44 obedience to be given to the word of God, by reforming religion according to his prescribed will, by assisting the spiritual power with his temporal sword, by reformation of corruption, by procuring due obedience to the church, by judging and cutting off all frivolous questions and schisms, as Constantine did, and finally, by making decorum to be observed in all indifferent things for that purpose, which is the only intent of the oath of supremacy.'” To which we may also add, that appeals ought to be made in all causes, ecclesiastical and civil, from all other persons unto d King James’s apolog. p. [284. of his Works.] XXXVII. Of the Civil Magistrate . 561 him, and to him only. So that it is lawful to appeal from any other unto him, but not from him to any other. And in the exercise of this his power he is to make the testimonies of God the men of his counsel, as king David did, Psalm cxix. 24, but is not bound to give account of his actions and exercise of his power to any person upon earth, but only to the God of heaven ; and therefore may well be styled supreme governor (under God) over all persons, and in all causes, ecclesiastical as well as civil, within his majesty’s realms and dominions. Neither is this any other prerogative than what hath been si ill given to godly princes in the holy scriptures by God himself; for thus we find king David, a man after God's own heart, gathered together all the princes of Israel, with the priests and Levites , prescribing them rules to be observed in the wor¬ ship of God, 1 Chron. xxiii. 2, &c. xxv. and xxvi; and there¬ fore it is said, All these were under the hands of their father for song in the house of the Lord , with symbols, psalteries , and harps , for the service of the house of God, according to the king's order to Asaph , Jeduthun , and Heman, c. xxv. 6; so that it seems the king had given them order about the service of God. Thus good king Josiah commanded Hilkiah the high priest , and the priests of the second order, and the keepers of the door , to bring forth out of the temple of the Lord all the vessels that were made for Baal, &c. 2 Kings xxiii. 4. And certainly he would not have commanded such ecclesiastical persons un¬ less he had had the command over them. Neither had he power over ecclesiastical persons only, but in ecclesiastical causes too, otherwise he could never have made such a refor¬ mation in the church as he then did, ibid. c. xxii. and c. xxiii. And thus did prince Moses burn the golden calf, Exod. xxxii. 20. And king Hezekiali removed the high places, and brake the images, and cut down the groves, and brake in pieces the brazen serpent that Moses had made, 2 Kings xviii. 4. And king Jehoshaphat charged the priests a,nd Levites, saying. Thus shall ye do in the fear of the Lord faithfully and with a perfect heart, 2 Chron. xix. 9. Nay, so great was the power of the princes then over ecclesiastical persons, that the high priests themselves were ' reproved or deposed at the princes" 1 pleasure : for thus we find Aaron the high priest reproved by Moses, Exod. xxxii. 21, BEVERIDGE. o o 562 Of the Civil Magistrate. Art. and Abiathar the high priest deposed by Solomon, 1 Kings ii. 26, 27. And to manifest the prince’s power in ecclesiastical causes too, Mordecai, who then was the only prince amongst the Jews, ordained the feast of Purim, Esth. ix. 20, 21, 26; even as our king, now upon occasion, appoints fasting or thanksgiving days to be observed by all his people. And if we pass from the Old to the New Testament, there we have a strict command from the great God by St. Paul, saying, Let every soul be subject to the higher powers, Rom. xiii. 1; where, as St. Chrysostom observes, “ the apostle e shewing how he commands this to all, both priests and monks, and not only to secular persons, he makes it clear from the first words, saying, Let every soul be subject to the higher powers, though he be an apostle, though he be an evangelist, though he be a prophet, or whosoever he beso that ecclesiastical as well as lay persons are to be subject to the higher powers. But what higher powers ? Why St. Basil tells us: f “ Paul the apostle, writing to the Romans, commands that they be sub¬ ject to all powers that have the preeminence, to secular not spiritual powers; and this he manifests by what he adds, speaking of tribute and custom.' 11 So that ecclesiastical per¬ sons also are here commanded to be subject to the civil ma¬ gistrate, and then the civil magistrate must needs have power over ecclesiastical persons. And therefore doth St. Peter write to all persons, of what quality or degree soever, saying, Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake , 1 Pet. ii. 13; where by every ordinance of man he meaneth g kings and governors, as himself in the words immediately following explaineth himself, saying, whether it be to the king , e Kai Sclkvvs on 7ra.cn ravra bia- crlais rals tov Kocrpov, ov rads irvev- TarreTai, k at icpevcn p.oov re [p. 263.] v. Allat. de cons. pp. 219. 7 Tep\ rov TvayK.pa.Trj Qeov evaefieia Trj- 343. prjrai. Euseb. de vit. Constant. 1 . 3. 1 II elpav Xafioiv e/c rrjs koivcov C. [17* P- exnvpafjlas, oar) Trjs Oetas dvvdpecos o o 2 564 Of the Civil Magistrate. Art. the first place. And therefore, k “ mustering as it were the army of God, he gathered together an oecumenical synod, calling by his honourable letters the bishops from all places to make haste thither. Neither was the command all, but the authority of the king helped much. 11 By which it ap¬ pears, that he looked upon himself as the chief governor over ecclesiastical persons as well as in ecclesiastical causes, other¬ wise he could not have laid such commands upon them to take such journeys as many of them did at his will and pleasure. Neither did the emperor only call that famous council, but it was he that confirmed their decrees too. For 1 “ Athanasius, 1 "’ saith Theodoret, “ going to Constans the emperor, minded him of his father and of the great synod which he gathered together, and how he, being present at the assembly, con¬ firmed by a law what was written by them. 11 From whence it appears, that then the civil magistrate had power not only over persons but in causes ecclesiastical, seeing the convoca¬ tion and confirmation of councils depended upon them. But we need not insist any longer upon oecumenical councils, for we have shewed before, art. XXI., how none of them were gathered together but by the commandment and will of princes. But the principal question is concerning national or pro¬ vincial councils, whether every particular prince (and so ours) hath power to gather them together and confirm their decrees or no. For certainly, if the convocation and confirmation of all ecclesiastical councils within his realm depends solely and principally upon him, it must needs follow, that he is supreme both over persons and in causes ecclesiastical as well as civil, it being in such councils that all ecclesiastical causes are determined. And for the resolving of this question, though we cannot k Et<9’ axnrep imcrTpaTeviov avrS Oeov cpaXayya, avvodov obcovpeviKrjv avveKpoTa, (nrevdeiv ciuavra^oOev tovs emcTKOTrovs ypappacn TiprjTLKois npo- KaXovp-evos' ovk rjv & aiikovv to £ttl- raypa’ o-wr/pyei 8e kol civtt} npa^ei to ftao-iXeoos vevpa. Ibid. c. 6. fp. 579d * ’A davdcnos 7 rpos Kooi/crravra acpLKopevos, &C. Toine naTpos cnre- pvrjcre, paLa>v eKK\r]v vnep At av anoaroXcov, the £erai. Euseb. hist. 1. [3.] Keep, icp : vulgar hath it, Existimo enirn nihil where we may also observe how, me minus fecisse a magnis apostolis : though Peter was at Antioch, yet he how much nearer to the words comes reckons Euodius the first bishop. our translation, And I suppose I was z The vulgar Latin is here far not behind the very chiefest apostles- from rendering the right sense of according to which sense the Syriac p p 9 , 580 Of the Civil Magistrate. Art. the very chief est of the apostles , 2 Cor. xi. 5 ; For in nothing am I behind the very chief est apostles, chap. xii. 11. So that St. Paul did not look upon himself as any way inferior to any of the apostles; no not to Peter himself; and therefore when Peter did amiss, (for it seems Peter could err, though the pope cannot,) St. Paul withstood him to the face, because he teas to be blamed , Gal. ii. 11; intimating that he a reproved, yea and resisted Peter himself; which certainly he would never have done had he been the head of the church, and so his superior. Nay, St. Paul did not only look upon St. Peter as his equal, but St. Peter looked upon St. Paul as his supe¬ rior; for, saith St. Paul, When James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars , perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave unto me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship ; that we should go to the heathen, and they to the circumcision, ver. 9. So that Peter was so far from accounting himself to be above all, that he doth himself give the right hand of fellowship to St. Paul and Barnabas; and therefore, what¬ soever the church of Rome would make of Peter now, be sure he never took himself for the head of the church, but only as a fellow worker with the other apostles; and there¬ fore we may well say with Cyprian b , “ What Peter was, that was also the other apostles, endowed with the like fellowship of honour and power.” But Peter's supremacy being the foundation of the pope's also translates the words too, jj; j- »A J dmy (] /O _»;A.*io wil l ^A..] that is (not as the Latin translation hath it, Ar- bitror enirn nihil me minus preesti- tisse quam apostoli illi admodum preestantes, but), I suppose I am in nothing less than the apostles, which are most excellent; plainly intimating that there was none of the apostles above St. Paul, nor by consequence any of them the head of the church more than he; for then he must needs have come behind him. Where CEcumenius observes he saith, ovdev vcrrepqcra, ovde iveXmov, rj kcitotuv rfhOov tcov t rcp\ Herpov. QEcum. in loc. [p. 700. vol. I.] and St. Chry- sostome, ovkctl rrpos ckcivovs, ciXXd 7 rpos tovs 7repl Uerpov rroiovpevos rrjv avyspunv. Chrysost. in loc. [p. 668, 16. vol. III.] a So the Syriac renders cnAmoj I reproved him before his face j and St. Chrysostome, A 16 kcu UavXos e7TLTrXr]TTeL, kcu Herpos avc- X € rai, iva eyKaXovpevov rov SidaaKa- Xov Kal criyoiVTOs, cvKoXurepov oi pa- 6qra\ pcraOcovTai. Chrysost. in loc. [P- 73°’ 38- ibid.] b Hoc erant utique et caeteri apo¬ stoli quod Petrus, pari consortio prsediti, et honoris et potestatis. Cyprian, de unit, eccles. [p. 107.] XXXVII. 581 Of the Civil Magistrate. authority, to uphold this they bring every thing that hath but the face of an argument to maintain that; well knowing that if the apostle Peter was but equal to the other apostles, the bishop of Rome cannot be thought to have jurisdiction over other bishops ; and therefore, for the further confir¬ mation of this truth, it will be necessary to examine what they have to say against it. Now the Goliath which these Philistines send forth to defy the army of the Israelites, the principal argument they bring to prove Peter’s supremacy over the other apostles, and so the pope’s authority over the whole church, is the words of our Saviour to the same apostle, Thou art Peter , and upon this rock will I build my church , Matt. xvi. 18. From whence they would persuade us that Peter was appointed by our Saviour to be the foundation of the whole church. But surely, while they force such a gloss upon that place of scripture, they quite forget what St. Paul saith, For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid , which is Jesus Christ , 1 Cor. iii. 11; so that whatsoever sense they put upon the words, certainly it is the next door to blasphemy to take away Christ from being the foundation of the church, and to thrust Peter into his place; to take away Christ that purchased his church with his own blood, and to put in Peter that most shamefully denied Christ; to take away Christ that conquered Satan, and to put in him to whom Christ saith in the same chapter, Get thee behind me , Satan. In a word, what is if this be not blasphemy, to say not he who is the chief corner stone, 1 Pet. ii. 6, but he who was a rock of offence to Christ, Matt. xvi. 23, is the founda¬ tion of the church of Christ. But, for my own part, I cannot but admire how these Words came at first to be wrested to such a sense, which of them¬ selves they can by no means bear; for our Saviour doth not say, Thou art Peter, and upon thee I will build my church, but, Thou art Peter , and c upon this rock will I build my church; c To evade the force of the words Peter, in which language signi- upon this rock , the papists Bellar- fies both Peter and a stone, without mine, Maldonate, Petrus de Bollo, any change of the gender. To which and others, object it was not the I answer, i. It is true our Saviour Greek but Syriac language, wherein spoke these words not in the Greek our Saviour spoke these words to but Syriac language; but howso- 582 Art. Of the Civil Magistrate. viz. upon him whom thou hast now confessed to be the Son of God, or upon this confession which thou hast made of him. And howsoever the church of Rome may force another sense upon the words, certainly this is the exposition which the primitive church gave of them. Some of the fathers ex¬ pressly avouching Christ himself to be the rock here under¬ stood, others Peter's confession of Christ and faith in him; all which come to one and the same thing; therefore saith St. Augustine, d “ Christ is the foundation in the structure of a wise architect.” This wants no exposition ; for it is plainly said, For other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid , which is Christ; but if Christ, then without doubt the faith of Christ, for Christ dwells in our hearts by faith; so that to say Christ, or faith in Christ, or Peter’s confession of him, all comes to one and the same thing, all of them making Christ still, not Peter, to be the rock upon which the church is built. Let these of the fathers speak for the rest. e “ The Lord,” ever St. Matthew wrote them not in Syriac but in Greek, and therefore it is the Greek that is the original, not the Syriac. But, 2. it is plainly false that nd ’3 signifies both Peter and a stone without the change of the gender, or in the same gender. For that nd ’3 as it denotes Peter is of the masculine gender, I hope they will not deny (unless they will make Peter such a one as his pretended successor Joan was), whereas nd’S for a stone or rock is always of the feminine, as j.2>j.rs C2>an_x.» cnlo.j>j|o Et Jacob accepit Cepha et erexit earn, Gen. xxxi. 45. so, Cepha probata, angularis, pretiosa, Isai. xxviii. 16. Zocti |.o; Cepha magna erat, Mar. xvi. 4, and so else¬ where. Nay, 3. in this very place too nd’ 2, when spoken of Peter whose name it was, is of the mascu¬ line, but when used for a rock or stone is of the feminine gender, |aj_o jjcn \v ,\n et super hanc Ce¬ pha, non lmnc, for then it should have been jjoi not |»oi, which is a pronoun of the feminine gender. And therefore it is in vain to seek any elusion of the place from the Syriac, that being as plain against them as the Greek; for as in the Greek nerpoy and Tver pa are of dif¬ ferent genders, so are the first and second in Syriac of different genders too. d Fundamentum Christus est in structura architecti sapientis: hoc expositione non indiget. Aperte enim dictum est, Fundamentum enim aliud nemo potest ponere prceter id quod positum est, quod est Christus Jesus. Si autem Christus, proculdubio fides Christi. Per fidem quippe habitat Christus in cordibus nostris. Aug. de fide et operibus, [27. vol. VI.] e Dominus est petra fidei, tan- quam fundamentum, ut ipse Domi¬ nus ait ad principem apostolorum, Tu es Petrus, et super hanc petram cedijicabo ecclesiam meam, super con- fessionem videlicet Christi, quia dix- erat: Tu es Christus filius Dei vi- ventis. Greg. Nyssen. testim. contra Judfeos, c. ult. [p. 162. vol. II.] XXXVII. 583 Of the Civil Magistrate. saith Gregory Nyssen, “ is the rock of faith, as the foundation, as the Lord himself saith to the chief of the apostles, Thou art Peter , and upon this rocJc will I build my church , viz. upon the confession of Christ; for he had said, Thou art Christ the Son of the living God.” St. Augustine; f “ Thou art there¬ fore,” saith he, “ Peter, and upon this rock which thou hast confessed, upon this rock which thou hast acknowledged, saying, Thou art Christ the Son of the living God , will I build my church, I will build thee upon me, not me upon thee.” And again; s “ For therefore saith the Lord, Upon this rock, will I build my church , because Peter had said, Thou art Christ , the Son of the living God; upon this rock therefore, saith he, which thou hast confessed, will I build my church. That rock was Christ, upon which foundation Peter himself is also built.” And again; h “ What means that, Upon this rock will I build my church f Upon this faith, upon that which was said, Thou art Christ , the Son of the living God.” 1 “ And upon this rock,” saith St. Chrysostome, “ I will build my church, that is, upon the faith of this confession.” And again; ku Upon this rock; he did not say upon Peter, for he did not build his church upon a man, but upon faith; but what faith was it i Thou art Christ , the Son of the living God And St. Jerome ; 1 “ By the rock we signify Christ; for if we f Tu es ergo, in quit, Petrus ; et super hanc petram quam confessus es, super hanc petram quam cogno- visti, dicens, Tu es Christus filius Dei vivi, sedificabo ecclesiam meam. Super me sedificabo te, non me su¬ per te. Aug. de verbis Domini, sec. Mat. serm. [76. 1. vol. V.] s Ideo quippe ait Dominus, Super hanc petram cedificabo ecclesiam meam, quia dixerat Petrus, Tu es Christus filius Dei vivi: super hanc ergo, inquit, petram, quam confessus es, sedificabo ecclesiam meam. Petra erat Christus: super quod funda- mentum etiam ipse sedificatus est Petrus. Id. in Joh. tract. 124. [5. par. ii. vol. III.] h Quid est, super hanc petram (edificabo ecclesiam meam ? Super hanc fidem, super id quod dictum est, Tu es Christus filius Dei viven- tis. Id. in epist. Joh. tract. 10. [1. ibid.] i Kat eVi tcivtt] rrj nerpa oiKodo- pYjaco pov rrjv isuX-rjcriav’ rovrecm, TTj 7r tt/s opoXoyias. Chrysost. in Mat. horn. 54. [p. 344, 19. vol. II.] k ’E7ri TavTrj rfj Trerpa. Ovk etVe v, €Tr\ to 3 Trerpo)' ovre yap eVrt to) av- 0pd)7rcp, a\X ini rr]v 7 TL(ttiv tt)v eav- tov iKKXrjcr'iav axodoprjo-e. T 1 de rjv rj niaris; av ei 6 Xpiaros, 6 vlos tov Q eov roG ^covtos. Id. horn, de pen- tecoste 1. tom. V. p. 979. [4.] 1 Per petram significamus Chri¬ stum quem Petrus confessus est. Nam si capiamus Petrum pro petra fundamentali, seque essent et cseteri apostoli, sicut legimus in apoc. Jo- hannis. Hieron. in loc. 584 Of the Civil Magistrate. Art. take Peter for a fundamental rock, the other apostles would be as much as he, as we read in the Revelations of John.” Basil of Seleucia; m “ Christ calling his confession a rock named him Peter that first ackno wledged it.” n “ Let us see,” saith Eusebius Emissenus, “ what this means, And upon this rock will I build my church: Upon this rock which thou even now confessedst, saying, Thou art Christ , the Son of the living God , upon this rock and upon this faith will I build my church.” °“ Wherefore,” saith St. Ambrose, “the Lord saith to Peter, Upon this rock I will build my church; that is, in this confession of the catholic faith I appoint believers to life.” Yea, and pope Adrian himself the firstP, “Upon this rock which thou hast confessed, and from which thou ob¬ tain edst the dignity of thy name, upon this soundness of faith, I will build my church.” And Felix the third, 8 “Upon this confession will I build my church.” So unanimous were the fathers of the primitive church in striking at the founda¬ tion of the pope’s supremacy. For it is upon this place it is chiefly built; which being not to be understood of Peter’s person, but his confession, or rather not of Peter that con¬ fessed Christ, but of Christ whom Peter confessed, neither Peter nor his successors can claim any jurisdiction in this or any other Christian realms from these words. Another foundation they would ground Peter’s primacy, and so the pope’s supremacy upon, is the verse following the words we have already cleared from their false glosses; viz. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and m T avrrjv Trju opokoytav rrerpav KaXecras 6 Xpio-ros, Tlerpov ovopa^ei tov npooToos TavTijv 6po\oyr]cravTa. Basil. Seleuc. in loc. [orat. 25. p. J 4 2 -] . n Videamus quid sit; et super hcinc petrarn cedificabo ecclesiam meant: super hanc petram, quam tu modo docuisti, dicens : Tu es Christus filius Dei vivi. Super hanc petram et super hanc fidem cedifi- cabo ecclesiam meam. Euseb. Emis. hom. in natal. S. Petri, [p. 795. vol. VI. Max. Bibl. Patr.] 0 Unde dicit Dominus ad Petrum; Super istarn petram cedificabo eccle¬ siam meam, hoc est, in hac catholicse fidei confessione statuo fideles ad vitam. Ambros. in Eph. c. 2. £p. 236. app. vol. II.] p Super hanc petram, quam con- fessus es, et a qua vocabuli sortitus es dignitatem, super hanc solidi- tatem fidei ecclesiam meam sedifi- cabo. Adrian, prim, epist. ad epi- scop. Gal. et Hispan. [p. 867. vol. IV. cone. Hard.] <1 Kat eVl Tavrrj rrj opokoyla ol- Kodopr/a'o) pov ti) v eK.K\r)crlav. Felix papa tert. epist. ad Zen. August, apud Gennad. pro concil. Florent. c. 5. [p. 828. vol. II. ibid.] XXXVII. Of the Civil Magistrate. 585 whatsoever thou shalt hind on earth shall he hound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall he loosed in heaven. Matt. xvi. 19- From which words they conclude that the power of the keys was granted only to Peter; not considering that what is here said to Peter in the singular is elsewhere spoken to all the disciples in the plural number; Whatsoever ye shall hind on earth shall he hound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall he loosed in heaven , Matth. xviii. 18: and, Whose soever sins ye remit , they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain , they are retained , John xx. 23. So that the power of the keys was not only committed to Peter, but to all the disciples, and so not to the pope only, but to all ministers rightly ordained. r “For all the apostles,” saith St. Jerome, “ received the keys of the kingdom of hea¬ ven.” And s “ what is it else,” saith Pacianus, “ that he saith to the apostles, Whatsoever ye hind on earth f &c.; so that it was not to Peter only, but to all the apostles that these words were said. “And therefore,” saith Augustine, tu the church which is founded in Christ received in Peter the keys of the kingdom of heaven from him, that is, power to bind and loose sins.” And St. Basil; u “ And he gave the like power to all pastors and masters, which appears in that all bind and loose alike as well as he,” viz. Peter. And St. Cyprian; w “Christ after his resurrection gave the like power to all his apostles, and said, As my Father hath sent me , so send I you: Receive the Holy Ghost: if you remit to any his sins , they are remitted unto him; if you retain them , they shall he retained .” Theophy- r Cuncti apostoli claves regni cae- lorum accipiunt. Hieron. adv. Jo- vinian. 1 . 1. [26. vol. II.] s Quid est aliud quod apostolis dicit, Qiue ligaveritis in terris ligata erunt in ccelis, &c. Pacian. ad Sym- pron. ep. 1. [p. 306. vol. IV. Max. Bibl, Patr.] t Ecclesia ergo, quae fundatur in Christo, claves ab eo regni caelorum accepit in Petro, id est, potestatem ligandi solvendique peccata. Aug. in Joh. tract. 124. [5. par. ii. vol. III.] u Kat ttcktl 8e to7s ecfie^-qs TTOipem Kai didacncaXois, rrjv tcrrjv nape^ovros i^ovuiav' Kai tovtov arjpelov, to decr- p.e7i> arravras opoiois, Kai Xveiv, coanep cKeivos. Basil. Constitut. monast. reg. 22. [p. 792. vol. II.] w Christus apostolis omnibus post resurrectionem suam parem potes¬ tatem tribuit et dicit: Sicut misit me Pater, et ego mitto vos j Accipite Spiritum S. Si cui remiseritis pec¬ cata, remittentur ei, si cui retinueri- tis, tenebuntur. Cyprian, de unitate ecclesiae, [p. 107.] 586 Of the Civil Magistrate. Art. lact; xU For those that after Peter are thought worthy of the episcopal grace have power to loose and bind. For though it be said to Peter only I will give to thee , yet the same power was given to all the apostles, when he said, Whose soever sins ye remit shall he remitted .” Leo the First; y “ This power of the keys is translated also to all the apostles and presidents of the church. But the reason why it was com¬ mended singly to Peter was because the example of Peter was propounded to all the pastors of the church.” To name no more ; z “ It is to be noted,” saith Anselme, “ that this power was not given to Peter only, but as Peter answered one for all, so in Peter he gave this power to all.” By which cloud of witnesses it evidently appears, that this place makes as little for them as the other, Peter having no greater share in the power of the keys than the other apostles had. The third and last place they bring for the pope’s supre¬ macy (for all their other places are not worth naming) is that in St. John, He saith unto him , (Peter,) Feed my sheep, John xxi. 16; from whence they argue, that Peter only had the care of the church committed to his charge; whereas in the chapter before, our Saviour saith to all his apostles, As my Father sent me, so send I you , John xx. SI. What did he send them to do \ why, Go ye and teach all nations , baptiz¬ ing them in the name of the Father , Son, and Holy Ghost , Matth. xxviii. 19. So that not only Peter, but all the apo¬ stles were to preach the gospel, and to look to the settlement and propagation of the church. And therefore saith St. Cy¬ prian, a “ All are pastors, but only one flock is shewn, which xJ/ E^ou(ri yap e^ovcriav acfnevaL rrjs emaKOTvrjS a^uodevres ^apiroy. Et yap nal Ttpos rLerpov povov e’tprjTai to bcocrco croi, aWa £ecrdai rals iKKXycrlaLs . Cone. Nic. can. 6. [p. 325. vol. I. Cone. Hard.] 588 Of the Civil Magistrate. Art. be preserved to the churches.” d “ Which canon,” as Balsa- moil saith, “ and the seventh determined that the patriarchs, to wit of Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem be honoured according to the ancient customs, and that he of Alexandria be over the provinces of Egypt, Libya, and Penta- polis. He of Antioch also over Syria, Coelesyria, Mesopota¬ mia, and both Cilicias ; he of Jerusalem over the provinces of Palestine, Arabia, and Phoenice, as they say the bishop of Rome is also over the western provinces.’” Whence we may observe from this council, 1. that the bishop of Rome hath no other authority over the churches near him, than the bishops of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem have over those near them; and so, 2. that in the judgment of this renowned council, the bishop of Rome is no universal bishop, nor head over the whole church, there being other bishops that have as much to do in one part of the church as he in another. 3. That what authority he hath it is not of divine right, but only of custom, as the words of the canons expressly declare. The next general council was held at Constantinople, and determined e “ that the bishops of any diocese should not go to any churches beyond their limits or diocese, nor con¬ found the churches ; but that according to the canons the bishop of Alexandria look to the church affairs in Egypt d *0 7 T apCOV KdVcOV Kdl 6 C 8iop[£ov- rat tovs re nciTpiapxas, 8rjXa8rj tov 'P coprjs, tov ’ AXefjavSpeias, tov ’Av - tlox^los, /cat tov 'IcpocroXvpcov Kara ra naXaia edrj TtpacrOai, kcu tov piv ’A Xe^av8peias npoi^^iv tcov iv A l- yv7TTCp, KCU Aij3vr], KCU HevTCinoXei inapxi&v. Tov ’ AvTLox^ias opo'icos Trjs 2vplas, Trjs KolXrjs 'S.vplas, Trjs MccronoTapias, kcu cKaTepas K eXiKias’ tov 8e TepocroXvpcov tow iv ttj Ila- Xciio’TLVT] inap^ccov, toov iv ’Apa/ 3 ta, kcu tcov iv Qoiv'iKrj, oti cprjcrl kcu 6 iniCTKOTTOS TTjS 'P COprjS TTpoix^l TCOV iancpicov inapx>-cov. Balsam, in loc. [p. 66 . Bever. Synod, vol. I.] e Tovs V7 rep dcoLKrjcnv inecrKonovs Tciis VTVcpopLOLS iKKXrjcTLaLS prj iirievcu, pr]8e (jvyxitLV tcis iKKXrj crlcis' aXXa Kara tovs Kavovas tov piv 'AXetjav- 8 pc [as inlcrKonov ra iv AlyvnTco povov olKovopclv' tovs re Trjs avaToXrjs ini- < TK07T0 VS ttjv dvaToXrjv povov 8 lOIK€IV’ (jivXaTTopivcov tcov iv Tols Kavoai tois K ara N iKaiav npecrficicov Trj ’A vrio^icov iKKXijcrla. Kai tovs re ’Acriavrjs 81- OLKTjCTCCOS iniCTKOnOVS TCL KOTCl TTJV ’ Acriavr/v povov olKovopilv' feat tovs tt/s II ovTiKrjs ra Trjs Uovtikt/s pova' /cat tovs Trjs QpaKLKrjs ra Trjs QpaKiKrjs povov oiKovopelv. ’AkXtjtovs 8i im- c tkottovs vnip 8ioLKT)cnv prj inc^alveiv ini x^ l P OT °v[o, rj tlctlv aXXais oikovo - plaes iKKXrjcnacrTLKals. •TvXaTTopivov 8e tov npoyeypappivov nepl tcov 8 lol- Krjcrecov Kavovos, ev8t]Xov a>? ra Kad ’ eKacTTrjv inapfav rj Trjs inapfas ctvvo 8 os 8 lolkt]ctcl, koto. ra iv Nt/eata copiarpiva. Concil. Constantinop. 1. can, 2. [p. 809. vol. I.] XXXVII. 589 Of the Civil Magistrate. only; and the bishops of the east govern the east only, the privileges granted to the church of Antioch by the canons of the Nicene council being preserved. And that the bishops of the Asian diocese administer the ecclesiastical affairs in Asia only; they of Pontus in Pontus only; and they of Thracia in Thracia only. But that no bishop, unless he be called, go out of his own diocese for ordination, or any other ecclesiastical administration. But the canon concerning the dioceses being observed, it is plain that, according to the determination of the Nicene council, the council of the province administer and govern every province.” Whence we may learn, 1. that no bishop is to exercise any authority out of his own province or diocese, and by consequence not the bishop of Rome; 2. that in case the bishops particularly cannot decide any contro¬ versy, the bishops of the province where it is started must end it, without any appeals to him of Rome. But Constantine having now removed his court from Rome to Byzantium, (from whom it was afterwards called Constantinople,) this council determined also f “ that the bishops of Constantinople have the privilege of honour next after the bishop of Rome, because it is now new Romewhich shews that the bishop of Rome was so much honoured only because it was the emperor’s seat, and that the honour still followed the emperor: so that when he was removed to Byzantium, a city of no great note before, nor mentioned in the Nicene council as having any patriarch belonging to it, yet the emperor seating himself there, there is not only a patriarch ordained of the place, but he is preferred before Antioch, Alexandria, and Jerusalem, and is placed next to Rome, who is therefore placed first^ because the emperor’s seat was still there. To this purpose also makes the twenty-eighth canon of the fourth general council, viz. at Chalcedon: s “ In all things fol- f Toj/ pep KcovcrTavTivovTroXecos ini- (jkotxov z'x eLV r “ T^pfO'/Sela rr/s Tiprjs fxera top ttjs 'Pc oprjs eniaKOTrov, bia to elvai avrt/v peap ’Pdprjp. Ibid, can. 3. £ Ilavraxov to?s tcop ay loop n are pap opois enopcpoi, Kat top dpTLws apa- ypaxrOtPTa Kapopa twp eKarov nevrrj- KOPTa OeocfoiXecrTaTodP imcrKOTrav ypco- pi^opTes, to. avrd Kai rjpels opl^opep re Kal y\rr)v iv rfj inapfa eiucrKOTroiv, iravrcs re crvpcfxDvoi piav ko.t avrov i^eveyKOLev y\ri)(f)ov' tovtov pr/Ken Trap irepoLS ducafccrdcu, «XXa peveiv fie- fiaiav rr\v crvp.(f)a}vov tcov irn rrjs inapxLas iTucrKoncov dnoffiacriv. Con- cil. Antioch, can. 15. [p. 599. vol. I.] 11 Item placuit ut episcopi, dia- coni, vel caeteri inferiores clerici, in causis quas habuerint, si de judiciis episcoporum suorum quaesti fuerint, vicini episcopi eos audiant; et inter eos quicquid est finiant, adhibiti ab eis ex consensu episcoporum suo¬ rum. Quod si et ab iis provocandum putaverint, non provocent, nisi ad African a concilia, vel ad primates provinciarum suarum. Ad transma¬ rina autem qui putaverint appellan- dum, a nullo intra Africam in com- munionem suscipiatur. Concil. Mi- levit. 2. cap. 22. [p. 1221. ibid.] XXXVII. 593 Of the Civil Magistrate. judgments of their own bishops, let the neighbour bishops hear them. But if they think also that appeal should be made from them, let them not appeal, but only to the African councils, or the primates of their provinces. But whosoever shall think that appeals should be made to any foreign power, or beyond the seas, let them not be received by any into communion within Africa.” And if all causes must be deter¬ mined in the province where they rise, and no foreign power must be appealed to, then certainly not the bishop of Rome, unless the question arise in his own province. And this is that which was determined also in the council of Nice, the fifth canon whereof is, 0 “ Concerning those as are excommu¬ nicated, either of the clergy or laity, by the bishops of every province, let this rule be observed, according to the canon that pronounceth, that they that are excommunicated by some bishops do not go to others. But let it be examined whether it be for hatred, contention, or any other fault of the bishop, that they are excommunicated; for the better exami¬ nation of which, it seemeth well that in each province twice a year councils meet; that all the bishops of the province meeting together, such questions may be examined; and so they that have evidently offended their bishop may seem to all justly excommunicated, until it shall seem good to the bishops to pass a milder sentence upon them.” Where we may take notice, 1 . that they that are excommunicated by the bishops of one province ought not to appeal to the bishops of any other province whatsoever, and by consequence not to the bishop of Rome; 2 . that all questions should be deter¬ mined in the province where they arise; 3. that such persons as are excommunicated be so accounted by all till the bishops ° Ilepi tcov aKOLveovrjTCov yevopevcov, fire tcov iv KXrjpco eire tcov Xaiiccp Ta.ypa.Ti, vno tcov Kaff eKaarr/v inap- X>- a V tTnCTKOTVCOV, KpCLTe’lTCO f) yi>coprj Kara tov Kavova tov diayopevovra, tovs v(f) irepcov dnol3Xr]3evTas, v(p> erepcov prj 7rpocriecr0ai. ’E £eTa£eardco 8e, pr] piKpo\lsvxlq, rj (pcXoveiKca, tj tlvl TOLavrr) ciri8iq tov enurKonov dno- crvvaycoyoi yeyivrjvTcu' iva ovv tovto tt) v npcnovcrav e^eracnv \ctp[3dvr), kci- Xcos *X eLV t8o£ev, enucTTOV eviavrov KaO ’ cKaaTrjv eVap^tW 8ls tov ctovs crvv68ovs ytveadai' iva Koivfj navrcov TCOV ItVLCTKOTVCOV Ttjs €7 Tapxl-CIS €7Tl TO avTo avvayopevcov, tci toicivtci Cv t V~ pciTct etjeTafyiTO' kcu ovtcos ol opoXo- yovpevcos 7 rpocrKeKpovKOTes tco eVi- ( TKOTvco , KciTci Xoyov aKoivcovqToi Trapa 7 Tacnv civcu 8o£cocn, pexpt-s civ tco kolvco tmv emcricoTZCov 8o^rj tt)v (jnXav- OpconoTepav vnep ai)Tcbv eKdecrdcu cpov. Concil. Nic. i. can. 5. [pp. 324 , 5 . ibid.] q q BEVERIDGE. 591 Of the Civil Magistrate. Art. themselves, by whom they were excommunicated, receive them into the church again, no respect at all being had in this particular to the bishop of Rome more than to other bishops. For the further clearing of this particular, we have also a remarkable passage in the sixth council at Carthage, an. Dom. 419; for the African bishops having deposed Celestius and Apiarius for certain crimes objected against them, they pre¬ sently appeal from them to Zosimus then bishop of Rome? who, contrary to the Nicene decree before recited, restores them again; and for the better confirmation of this his resti¬ tution, the said bishop sends legates, viz. Faustinus, a bishop, Phillipius and Asellus, priests, with the foresaid Apiarius, to the council then met at Carthage, to prevail with the said council for their restitution of him also; and for the better accomplishing of his design, he ordered them to plead, that the first council of Nice decreed, that appeals should be made to the bishop of Rome, who might send priests from his side for the decision of the controversy. The legates being come to the council, and their orders being read, the council unani¬ mously agreed, that in P their copies of the council of Nice there was no such thing as that appeals should be made to the bishop of Rome, as he pleaded. But, howsoever, for their fuller satisfaction in that particular, they hasted messengers away to Constantinople and Alexandria, for the true and authentic copies of the said council. Atticus, bishop of Con¬ stantinople, and Cyril, of Alexandria, answer their desires. The councils having gotten the true Creek copies of the Nicene canons, they consult them too, but still find no such thing as the bishop of Rome pleaded, upon which they send to Celestinus, then bishop of Rome, (for Zosimus, before spoken of, yea, and Boniface too, his immediate successor, by this time were dead, and Celestinus sat in the chair, to whom the council of Carthage sends word,) amongst other things, p Quamvis enim plurimos codices Graecoeapotuimus invenire,ex orien- legerimus, sed nunquam in Nicaeno talibus ecclesiis, ubi perhibentur ea- concilio in Latinis codicibus legi- dem decreta posse etiam authentica mus, quemadmodum in supradicto reperiri, magis nobis desideramus commonitorio inde directa sunt: afferri. Epist. concil. Afric. ad Bo- tamen quia hie in nullo codice nifac. [p. 943. vol. I.] 505 XXXVII. Of the Civil Magistrate. / saying: q “ After our due salutation of you, we desire that hereafter you would not easily admit such as come from hence to your ears, nor hereafter receive into communion such as are excommunicated by us ; for your worship may easily perceive, that this was also defined by the council at Nice. 1 ' And presently; r “And the Nicene decrees did most clearly commit both the clergy of lower degree and the bishops them¬ selves to the metropolitans ; for they saw most prudently and justly, that all businesses should be ended in the places where they began; and that the grace of the Holy Ghost is not wanting to every province." And again ; s “ Or how can any foreign judgment stand good, to which the necessary wit¬ nesses, either by reason of the infirmity of their sex, or age, or many other impediments intervening, cannot be brought; for that any should be sent from your holiness's side, we do not find it appointed by any synod." Now in this passage of this African or Carthaginian coun¬ cil, there are these things worthy our observation : 1. that no less than three bishops of Rome, one after another, knew no r i Praefato itaque debitse saluta- tionis officio, impendio deprecamur, ut deinceps ad vestras aures hinc venientes non facilius admittatis, nec a nobis excommunicatos in commu- nionem ultra velitis excipere: quia hoc etiam Nicaeno concilio defmi- tum facile advertat venerabilitas tua. Epist. concil. Afric. sive Carthag. ad Caelestinum, [p. 947. ibid.] r Et decreta Nicaena sive inferio- ris gradus clericos, sive ipsos epi- scopos, suis metropolitan's apertis- sime commiserunt: prudentissime enim justissimeque viderunt, quae- cunque negotia in suis locis, (ubi orta sunt,) finienda; nec unicuique provinciae gratiam S. Spiritus defu- turam. Ibid. s Aut quomodo ipsum transma- rinum judicium ratum erit, ad quod testium necessariae personae, vel propter sexus, vel propter senectu- tis infirmitatem, vel multis aliis intercurrentibus impedimentis, ad- duci non poterunt ? Nam ut aliqui tanquam a tuae sanctitatis latere mittantur, nulla invenimus patrurn synodo constitutum. Ibid. From which last words the fourth and fifth canon of the council at Sardice decreeing appeals to Rome seem to be supposititious. For certainly, if that council had decreed any such thing, this that was not long after it (and therefore could not but be acquainted with their decrees) would not have said, Ut aliqui tanquam a tuae sanctitatis latere mittantur, nul¬ la invenimus patrum synodo con¬ stitutum. Especially considering that Athanasius, in his second apo¬ logy to the emperor, reckons up no fewer than thirty-six African bi¬ shops that were present at the Sar- dicean council, every one of which, it is more than probable, carried the canons of the council home with them, and so what that council de¬ termined could not hut be known to this. And this made Casanus Cardinalis himself ingenuously pro¬ fess, Satis posse dubitari an Sardi- censis concilii constitutio existat. De concord, cathol. 1. 2. c. 25. Q q 2 596 Of the Civil Magistrate. Art. divine right for the authority or jurisdiction of that bishopric over others; for here we see they are forced to fly to the con¬ stitution of a council for the confirmation of it, whereas had they thought that those words, Upon this rocJc will I build my church , or any other text of scripture, made any thing for it, they would never have run to a council for the proving of it. 2. That a whole council of famous bishops, amongst whom were Augustinus, Aurelius, and above two hundred others, though certainly well skilled in scripture, yet neither did they so much as dream of any place of scripture that proved the same; for had they, surely they would never have spent so much time in sending into Greece for the true copies of the Nicene council, to see whether that had decreed any such thing or no. 3. It is observable also, that this assertion is so far from being grounded upon scripture, that it was never so much as determined by a general council, but the bishop of Rome is forced to forge a canon for it. 4. It is observable also, that the bishop of Rome is fallible; for he either knew that the canon which he pleaded was not any canon of the council of Nice, or he did not know it. If he did q not know it, he must needs be fallible, so shamefully erring in so plain a thing as that was, which scarce any one could be ignorant of: if he did know it was not the council of Nice, and said it was that council that decreed it, he lied not only to the coun¬ cil, but to his own conscience too, confidently avouching that to be established by the council of Nice which himself knew was not. 5. That in the judgment of these reverend and learned fathers, the council of Nice decreed, that all ecclesias¬ tical controversies whatsoever should be ended in the province where they r arose, and no appeals to be made to foreign powers. Lastly, it is also here observable, that this council did unani¬ mously determine, that no appeals should be made from foreign provinces to the bishop of Rome in particular; which certainly they would not, they could not have done, had they thought that he had any jurisdiction over the whole church, or over any churches out of his own provinces ; all which being considered, we may well conclude, that the bishop of Rome hath not any power s or jurisdiction in the church of this realm in particular. not om. MS. r arise MS. s in MS. XXXVII. Of the Civil Magistrate . 597 Neither was the bishop of Rome's supremacy over the church of Christ in general only thus denied ; but his author¬ ity in the realm of England in particular hath been long ago resisted. Indeed, William the Conqueror himself, whom they pretend to be so much devoted to the pope's service, when pope Hildebrand, otherwise called Gregory the Seventh, sent his legate Hubertus to gather up the Peter-pence, and to require an oath of allegiance and fidelity to the pope from him, the king, in his letter to him sends him express word, 1 “ Your legate Hubertus, religious father, coming unto me, he admonished me of your part that I would swear fidelity to you and your successors, and consider better of the money which my predecessors used to send to the church of Rome; one of these things I have admitted, the other I have not admitted; I would not then, neither will I now swear to be faithful to you, because I neither promised any such thing, neither do I find that my predecessors did ever do so to your predecessors." From whence we may observe, how neither William the Conqueror nor his predecessors were absolutely subject to the pope, (for then he durst not have sent him such an answer,) and by consequence, that the pope even then had no absolute jurisdiction in this realm. And William the Conqueror being dead, and his second son, William Rufus, succeeding him in his kingdom, he did openly and expressly assert, that u “ no archbishop nor bishop of his kingdom should be subject to the court of Rome or the pope," and the reason he gave of it was, w “ because they do not follow the steps of Peter, gaping after rewards; they do not retain his power, whose holiness they are proved not to imitate." In this king's reign it was also that Anselme, archbishop of Can- t Hubertus legatus tuus, religiose pater, ad me veniens ex tua parte me admonuit, quatenus tibi et suc- cessoribus tuis fidelitatem facerem, et de pecunia, quam antecessores mei ad Romanam ecclesiam mittere solebant, melius cogitarem. Unum admisi, alterum non admisi. Fide¬ litatem facere nolui, nec volo; quia nec ego promisi, nec antecessores meos antecessoribus tuis id fecisse comperio. Ex Lanfranc. epist. apud Baron, an. 1079. [p. 555. vol. XI.] ; et MS. in Biblioth. Cotton, exscript, a Jacob. Armach. [vid. Cat. Cott. MSS. p. 584.] u Quod nullus archiepiscopus vel episcopus regni sui curiae Romanae vel papae subesset. Mat. Paris, hist, ad an. 1094. [p. 19.] w Quod Petri non haerent vesti- giis praemiis inhiantes; non ejus potestatem retinent cujus sanctita- tem probankir non imitari. Ibid. 598 Of the Civil Magistrate. Art. terbury, being denied leave by the king to go and fetch his pall from pope Urban, he presently appealed from the king to the pope, upon which the king told him, in plain terms, x “ that if he would desist from his purpose, and promise upon the gospels that he would not visit the thresholds of the apostles, nor for any business appeal to the seat of Rome, then he might peaceably use and enjoy his own and his friends 1 goods, and be over the principal of the kingdom in every gift; but if he shall purpose otherwise, it would be free for him to go over the sea, but that he would do unwisely, for he should never after have hope of returning home again. 11 Nay, and Anselme himself saith, in an epistle to Paschalis, then bishop of Rome, y u I asked leave of the king to go to the apostolical seat, to ask counsel about my soul and the office enjoined me. The king answered, that I sinned against him for the very asking of this leave; and he propounded to me, that I would either make satisfaction for this thing as for a fault, and assure him that I would never more ask such leave, nor ever after appeal to the see of Rome, or else that I would presently go out of his kingdom.” And not only so, but in a council gathered together, an. 1095, Edinerus, who was one of the council, relates how z “ all the bishops there present (he of Rochester excepted) denied due subjection and obedience to him. And the king himself took away all his confidence of him, and swore he would not take him any longer for an arch- x Quod si coeptis desisteret, si propositis evangeliis promitteret, se nec apostolorum limina visitaturum, nec pro quovis negotio Romanae sedis audientiam appellaturum, tunc et suis et rebus suorum, cum omni tranquillitate posse uti et frui, et regni rnajoribus in omni donatione praeesse. Sin secus ei visum est, trajicere quidem liberum esse, sed inconsulto id facturum, siquidem nullam revertendi spem imposterum ei futuram. Id. in major. Angl. hist. y Petii licentiam ab eo (rege), se- dem adeundi apostolicam, ut inde consilium de anima mea, et de offi¬ cio mihi injuncto acciperem. Re¬ sponds rex, me in se peccasse, pro sola postulatione hujus licentiae; et proposuit mihi, ut aut de hac re, sicut de culpa, satisfacerem, et secu- rum ilium redderem, ne amplius peterem lianc licentiam, nec aliquan- do apostolicum appellarem, aut de terra ejus cito exirem. Anselm, epist. 1. 3. epist. 40. ad Pasch. [p. 70.] z Episcopi itaque omnes qui affu- erunt, Roffensi solo excepto, aut uno aut alio modo debitam illi sub- jectionem et obedientiam abnegant. Rex etiam ipse cunctam ei confiden- tiam et securitatem sui in omnibus adimit, nec se ilium pro archiepi- scopo vel patre amplius habiturum jurat, nisi ipse vicario B. Petri se ulterius obediturum deneget. Edin. in vita Anselm, [p. 20.] XXXVII. 599 Of the Civil Magistrate. bishop or a father, unless he would deny that he would ever after give obedience to the vicar of St. Peter." From whence it appears, that almost six hundred years ago both the king and council determined that obedience ought not to be given by the subjects of this realm to the bishop of Pome, and by consequence, that the bishop of Rome even then had no juris¬ diction in this realm. And as the bishop of Rome had little or no authority in this realm in the days of the two Williams, kings of England, so had he as little in the days of the two Henrys which succeeded them. What power he had in the days of king Henry the First (brother to William Rufus, third son to William the conqueror), appears from the pope's letter to the said king, wherein, amongst other things, he said, a “ Seeing thou hast plentifully received from the hand of the Lord honour, riches, and peace, we much wonder and are grieved, that in thy kingdom and dominion St. Peter, (himself he meant,) and in St. Peter, the Lord hath lost his honour and right. For the messengers or letters of the apostolical seat obtain no reception or entrance into your dominion without the command of the royal majesty: there are no appeals from thence, no judgment is from thence appointed to the apostolical seat." So that it seems the pope had but small power here in the days of Henry the First; and truly he being dead, and Stephen also his immediate successor, the pope's power was as small in the days of king Henry the Second too ; for in his reign were there several laws and constitutions made at Clarendon which the clergy and nobility were to subscribe to ; and Thomas Becket, archbishop of Canterbury, was much troubled for opposing of them : as, that St. Peter's pence should no more be paid to the apo¬ stolical seat; that no decree or command proceeding from the a Cum de manu Domini largius potestate tua susceptionem aut honorem divitias pacemque sus- aditum promerentur. Nullus inde ceperis, miramur veliementius et clamor, nullum inde judicium ad gravamur quod in regno potestate- sedem apostolicam destinatur. que tua B. Petrus et in B. Petro Paschal, pap. epist. ad Henric. reg. Dominus honorem suum justitiam- Angl.; MS. in biblioth. Cotton, que perdiderit. Sedis enim apo- exscript, a Jac. Armach. [vid. Cat. stolicae nuncii vel literae praeter Cott. MSS. p. 188.] jussum regiae majestatis nullam in 600 Of the Civil Magistrate. Art. authority of the pope or the bishop of Canterbury (then out of the kingdom) be received in this realm ; and amongst other things it was decreed, as an ancient custom of this realm still to be observed, b “ that no appeals be made to the apostolical see without leave from the king and his officials;'” or, as it is more largely set down in the life of Thomas Becket, c “ Concerning appeals, if they go from the archdeacon they ought to proceed to the bishop, from the bishop to the archbishop, and if the archbishop be wanting in the exercise of justice, it must be brought last of all to the lord the king, that by his precept in the archbishop’s court the controversy may be ended. So that it ought not to proceed any further without the consent of our lord the king.’” By all which it evidently appears, that though the king might reverence the bishop of Rome, yet the bishop of Rome had no authority in his kingdom any further than the king himself would give him leave. I might trace the opposition that hath been made to the pope’s supremacy in this realm of England almost in every king’s reign since; but that would be a needless thing ; what we have said already being enough upon which to affirm, approve, and pronounce, with the university of Cambridge, (that debated this question in their regent house, an. Dom. 1534.) that the bishop of Rome hath no more state, authority, or jurisdiction given him by God in the scriptures over this realm of England than any other externe bishop hath ; and so, to conclude with what I began, the bishop of Home hath no jurisdiction or authority in this realm of England. b Quod non appellaretur pro causa aliqua ad sedem apostolicam nisi regis et officiaiium suorum venia impetrata. Johan. Sarisb. epist. 159. [p. 254.] c De appellationibus si emerserint ab archidiacono debent procedere ad episcopum, et ab episcopo ad archiepiscopum, et si archiepiscopus defuerit in justitia exhibenda ad dominum regem proveniendum est postremo; ut praecepto ipsius in curia archiepiscopi controversia ter- minetur; ita quod non debet ultra procedi absque assensu domini regis. Quadrilog. de vita Thom. Cantua- riensis, [c. 8. Rescr. initio 1 . 5.] XXXVII. Of the Civil Magistrate. 601 The laws of the realm may punish Christian men with death for heinous and grievous offences . It is lawful for Christian men, at the commandment of the magistrate , to wear weapons , and serve in the wars . I having transgressed my intended limits in speaking to the former parts of this article, I shall touch the more lightly upon these, especially considering that there is less opposition made against them, and therefore it is not so needful to ex¬ patiate upon the confirmation of them. First therefore of the first, that the laws of the realm may 'punish Christian men with death for heinous and grievous offences; for the proof of which truth I need go no further than the judicial laws of Moses, whereby several sorts of offenders were to be put to death for their several offences; as, murderers, Numb, xxxv.30. Exod. xxi. 12; idolaters, Deut. xvii. 5 ; the smiter of his father or mother, Exod. xxi. 15 ; a manstealer, ver. 16; he that curses father or mother, ver. 17; witches, c. xxii. 18; he that lieth with a beast, ver. 19 ; and many such like offenders, were to be punished with death, and that by the command of God himself. Now though it be not necessary for these and the like judicial laws to be received into a Christian kingdom or commonwealth, yet it cannot but be lawful to receive them and act according to them. It is true these laws were made and enacted for the government of the Jewish nation only, and therefore not necessarily to be ob¬ served by others: but howsoever, seeing it was God himself that did establish them, whose will is a law, and whose pleasure is the ground of duty, it cannot possibly be that they should be unlawful in themselves, having once the stamp of divine authority upon them. Had not it been lawful to punish offenders with death, God would never have com¬ manded it; or rather, seeing God was pleased to command it, it cannot but be therefore lawful; lawful I say, though not absolutely necessary; it is so lawful as that they may do it without sin, not so necessary as that they must do it or else sin. Seeing God enacted those laws, they are lawful to be received by all, though, seeing God enjoined them only to 602 Of the Civil Magistrate. Art. the Jews, they are necessarily to be observed only by them; though not necessarily to be observed now by them neither, they being no longer a peculiar nation, our Saviour by his cross having broken down the partition wall, and made of Jew and Gentile one sheepfold under himself, the chief Shepherd of our souls. And therefore Christ by his coming did not only abrogate the ceremonial but the judicial law too, so that after that time neither Jew nor Gentile z are obliged to the observation of them. But howsoever, though he did abrogate the necessity, he did not disannul the lawfulness of them, but it is still as lawful for all to observe those laws since his passion, as it was necessary for the Jews to observe them before his incarnation: and therefore such laws in particular as commanded offenders to be put to death may be observed now as well as then; or though those particular laws be not observed themselves, this general law deduced from them may, and ought certainly to be observed, even that heinous and grievous offenders be put to death. Neither do I speak this as if it was never lawful before Moses to punish any offenders with death ; for it was long before Moses commanded by God, Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man , Gen. ix. 6, and repeated by Christ, Matt. xxvi. 52; which plainly shews that it was not only lawful but necessary even before Moses’s time to punish murderers with death. And as it was before his laws were established, it must needs be also after that his laws are repealed, even necessary as well as lawful to punish him with death that was the cause of another’s death; especially considering that here is the reason of the law annexed, because in the image of God made he man , which reason always remaining, the law must need continue in force. And what is said of murder may also be applied to other the like offences, which whosoever are guilty of may justly be punished with death for them. Nay, such offences not only in justice may, but in justice ought to be so punished, for the magistrate bearetli not the sword in vain , for he is the minister of God , a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil , Rom. xiii. 4; and therefore a wise Jcing scattereth the wicked, and bringeth the z MS. was. XXXVII. 603 Of the Civil Magistrate . wheel over them, Prov. xx. 26. And that it is lawful howsoever to punish heinous offenders with death St. Augustine intimates to us, saying, a “ But he is no murderer who oweth his service to him that commandeth, as a sword is a help to him that useth it; and therefore they do not at all transgress against this command, whereby it is said, Thou shalt do no murder , who, God being the author, serve in war, or representing the person of the public power, do according to his laws, that is, according to the command of the most just reason, punish the wicked with death.” So that it is not only lawful but most just to punish wicked offenders with death. And as for the second thing, that it is lawful for Christian men at the command of the magistrate to serve in war, ap¬ pears in that it was lawful for the Jews, then the only people of God, even under the Old Testament, so to do; yea, God himself commanded them to go out to war, Num. xxxi. 2, 3. Jos. viii. 21. 1 Sam. xxiii. 2. And what was lawful for them cannot be sinful for us, though there were many things sinful to them which are now lawful to us. And this also further appears in the answer which John the Baptist gave to the soldiers that came unto him, for the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying , And what shall we do ? And he said , Do violence to no man , neither accuse any falsely , and be content with your wages , Luke iii. 14. He doth not say, Throw aside your weapons, and serve no more in war, but rather adviseth them, or howsoever permits them to continue in the same employment, by shewing them how to behave themselves in it, even being content with their wages. And thus nei¬ ther doth our Saviour command the centurion to resign his office, Luke vii, nor the apostles condemn Cornelius for being a centurion, Acts x; but to serve the magistrate in war was still looked upon as lawful as to serve him in any other employment, which in reason indeed we cannot but ac¬ knowledge, as considering the nature of a lawful war, (of a Non autem ipse occidit, qui gesserunt, aut personam gerentes ministerium debet jubenti, sicut publicae potestatis secundum ejus adminiculum gladius est utenti: et leges, hoc est, justissimae rationis ideo nequaquam contra hoc prae- imperium, sceleratos morte puni- ceptuin fecerunt, quo dictum est, erunt. Aug. de civitate Dei, 1 . i. Non occides, qui Deo autore bella c. 21. [vol. VII.] 604 Of the Civil Magistrate. Art. which only we now speak,) which is nothing else but a just defence of the magistrate's person, kingdom, and prerogatives, which certainly are so lawful to be defended that it is sinful not to endeavour to defend them. And thus did the fathers of old teach. b “ For the fathers,” saith St. Basil, 44 accounted slaughters in war to be no mur¬ ders, as I think excusing such as strive for temperance and pietywhich they would not have done if they had thought it unlawful. And St. Augustine, speaking of those words of God to Joshua, Lay thee an ambush for the city behind it , saith, c “ We are hence admonished that this is not unjustly done by such as wage a just war; that a just man should not take much thought about these things, but only that he under¬ take a just war, to whom it is lawful to war or to serve in war.” The first council at Arles decreed, d 44 Concerning those that use their arms in peace, it pleaseth us that they be ex¬ communicated implying that it is lawful to use them in war, not in peace. And the council at Magunce; eU We (ministers) who have left the world, this we will by all means observe, that having spiritual arms, we lay aside our secular: but the lay persons which are with us we do not hinder from wearing weapons; because it is an ancient custom, and hath been brought down even to us.” And Sigebertus Gemblacensis tells us how in an ancient assembly of French bishops, f 44 one b Tovs iv Troke/ioLs (fiouovs oi 7rare- pes r]pa>v iv tols (jiovois ovk e\oyl- aavro, epol doKelv, avyyvu>pr)v dovre? to'is vTrep aciXppoavvTjs Koi evcre/Selas apwopevois. Basil, ad Amphil. epist. i. [p. 26. vol. III.] c Hinc admonemur non injuste fieri ab his, qui justum bellum ge- runt; ut nihil homo justus prsecipue cogitare debeat in his rebus, nisi ut justum bellum suscipiat, cui bellare fas est. Aug. in Jos. 1 . 6. quaest. 10. [vol. III.] d De his qui arma projiciunt in pace, placuit abstinere eos a com- munione. Cone. Arel. 1. can. 3. [p. 263. vol. I. Cone. Hard.] e Nos autem qui relinquimus se- culum, id modis omnibus observare volumus, ut arma spiritualia haben- tes secularia dimittamus. Laicis vero, qui apud nos sunt, arma por- tare non prsejudicemus; quia anti- quus mos est, et ad nos usque per- venit. Cone. Magunt. c. 17. [p. 1013. vol. IV. ibid.] f Unus eorum dixit, coelitus sibi delatas esse literas quse pacem mo- nerent renovandam in terra; quam rem man davit cseteris, et haec tra- denda dedit populis; Arma quis- quam non ferret, direpta non repe- teret, &c. Gerardus Cameracensis, (qui solus Lothariensium appen de¬ bat ad parochiam Francorum,) nul- lius hortatu potuit adduci ad hsec recipienda, sed singula eapitula re- fellebat; dicens, genus hominum ab initio trifariam esse divisum, in oratoribus, pugnatoribus, agriculto- ribus, et unum duorum, et duos unius egere auxilio, ideo debere arma ferri. et rapinas reddi per auc- toritatem legis et gratiae. Sigebert. ad an. 1032. [p. 595.] XXXVII. O f the Civil Magistrate. 605 of them said he had letters brought him from heaven, which advised that peace be renewed upon earth: which thing he enjoined the others, and gave these things to be delivered to the people, that no one should bear arms, nor fetch back again what was taken from him, &c. But Gerardus Camer- acensis could by no persuasions be brought to receive these things, but confuted every particular head; saying that man¬ kind was from the beginning divided into three sorts, orators, fighters, and husbandmen, and the one of these wants the help of the two, and the two of the one, and therefore that weapons ought to be worn, and rapines be restored by the authority both of law and grace.’"’ And so we conclude it is lawful for Christian men , at the commandment of the magis¬ trate\ to wear weapons, and serve in the wars. ARTICLE XXXVIII. OF CHRISTIAN MENS GOODS, WHICH ARE NOT COMMON. The riches and goods of Christians are not common , as touching the right, title , and possession of the same , as certain Anabaptists do falsely boast. Notwithstanding , every man ought , of such things as he possesseth 9 liberally to give alms to the poor , according to his ability. T HOUGH communion of saints be a truth which ought to be believed by all, yet community of goods is an error which cannot be received by any, it striking at the foundation of Christian society, and subverting the whole scope of the holy scriptures; for if no man hath a propriety in any thing he enjoys, but his neighbour hath as good a title to it as himself, as the Fratricellians of old and the Anabaptists of late fancied, what signify the commands of God, Thou shalt not steal Exod. xx. 15, and, Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour s house , ver. 17? If I have as much right to my neighbour’s goods as himself, how can I be said to steal any thing from him, when it is no more but to receive what is mine own of him ? or why should I be forbidden to covet his house, when it is my own as well as his ? And what then means that place of scripture also, It is a more blessed thing to give than to receive f Acts xx. 35. For if one man hath no more right to what he enjoys than another, how can one man be said to give to another, or the other to receive any thing as a gift from him ? Certainly by this rule I cannot steal any thing from another, though I take all he hath from him ; neither can he be said to give any thing to me, though he bestoweth all he hath upon me. For if I 607 Art. XXXVIII. Of Christian Mens goods , fyc. take any thing from him, I take no more than what is my own as well as his; and if he bestows any thing upon me, he gives me that which is no more his than mine own; and so accord¬ ing to this fancy (for an opinion I cannot call it) there could not be any stealing, neither need there be any giving. I could not steal though I would, and I need not give though I could. And further, admit this dream to be a truth, why should we be commanded to provide for our families, 1 Tim. v. 8 ? to give to him that asketh us, and to lend to him that would borrow of us, Matt. v. 42 1 Why should St. Paul’s hands minister to his necessities, Acts xx. 34, and labour night and day that he might not be chargeable to any, 1 Thess. ii. 9? And many of the like places we find in scripture, which would signify nothing, if one man had no more title to or propriety in what himself enjoys than another. It is true 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 , Acts iv. 32. This is the text which is commonly wrested to the destruction of the truth of this article : but certainly, if rightly understood, it will make more for it than against it; nay, not at all against it, but altogether for it. For here it is plainly said, No man said of ought that he possessed; so that it seems they had their several possessions at that time, which could not be if all things were so common amongst them as touching the right, title, and possession of the same. All things were indeed common amongst them as to the use of, but not as to the title to what they enjoyed. All things were so common as that none of them but willingly com¬ municated what he had to others, but not so common as that others had a right and title to it as well as he; which also further appears in that it is said, And as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them , and brought the prices of the things which were sold , and laid them at the apo¬ stles ’ feet: and distribution was made to every man according to his need , Acts iv. 34, 35. From whence it appears that some were possessors of lands, others not; and it was they that possessed the lands that went and sold them; and when they had sold them they brought them to the apostles, and the apostles distributed to every one according as he had 608 Of Christian Men's Goods , Art. need; plainly implying that some had need and others not, and some had lands and others not, and they that had them it was in their power, not in the others' to sell them, and in their power, not in the others' to bring them to the apostles; yea, and it was in their power to bring them or not to bring them too. And therefore saith Peter to Ananias, Whilst it remained , was it not thine own ? and after it was sold , was it not in thine own poiver ? Acts v. 4. So that before he had sold it, it was his own, not another's, and after he had sold it, it was still in his own power, not another’s; and so he alone had a title and right to it, until he had resigned it up to the apostles. Whence we may plainly see, that though there were not any amongst them that lacked, it was not be¬ cause that they that had not estates had a title to theirs that had, a but because they that had estates were willing to com¬ municate unto them that had not; so that there was a com¬ munication of estates to one another, and yet not a commu¬ nity in one another's estates. And in this sense is Tertullian also to be understood when he saith, b “All things are common with us but only our wives; in that thing only we break community in which only other men exercise communitynot as if all things were then common as to the right, title, and possession of them, but all things were common as to the use and enjoyment of them. So that he that had no possessions enjoyed something of his that had; not because he had a title to it, but because he that had a title to it was pleased to communicate some part of it to him that had not; not some part of the title he had to his estate, but some part of the estate he had a title to. And in that he that had an estate gave to him that lacked, it is plain that he that lacked an estate had no right to his that had one. And that Tertullian is thus to be un¬ derstood appears from what himself not long before saith in the same place ; c “ That which is a kind of chest is not a A la tovto yap rj ^ dpt ?, oti ov$e\s b Omnia indiscreta sunt apud nos rjv ev8er]s‘ Tovrecrriv, ano Trjs noWps praeter uxores. In isto loco con- TrpoOvpias tg>v ini8i8ovToov ov8e\s rjv sortium solvimus in quo solo caeteri evderjs' ovyap piprj pev e8L8oaav, peprj homines consortium exercent. Ter- 8e erapuyovTO' ov8e ndvra piv e8l8o- tull. apol. C. 39. [vol. V.] Qea). Clem, epist. ad Corinth, pp. 49 .‘50. s Dicet aliquis : nonne sunt apud vos alii pauperes, alii divites ? alii servi, alii domini ? nonne aliquid inter singulos interest? nihil; nec alia causa est, cur nobis invicem fratrum nomen impertiamus, nisi quia pares esse nos credimus. Nam cum omnia humana non corpore, sed spiritu metiamur, tametsi cor- porum sit diversa conditio, nobis tamen servi non sunt; sed eos et habemus, et dicimus spiritu fratres, religione conservos. Lactant. de justit. c. [16. vol. I.] h Cum itaque et liberi servis, et divites pauperibus humilitate animi pares simus, apud Deum tamen vir- tute discernimur. Ibid. XXXVIII. which are not Common. 611 and therefore it is added in the article, Notwithstanding , every man ought, of such things as he possesseth , liberally to give alms to the poor , according to his ability. According to the apostle’s command, Charge them that are rich in this world , that they do good , that they be rich in good works , ready to distribute , ivilling to communicate , 1 Tim. vi. 17,18. And ‘many such commands are there in scripture, with promises and threatening annexed to them, whereby all are enjoined to communicate of what they have unto such as lack it. Although the poor hath no title to the estates of the rich, yet the rich are bound to relieve the necessities of the poor; and therefore saith St. Basil, k “ Art thou poor? yet thou hast another poorer than thyself; thou hast bread enough for ten days, he but for one ; what abounds to thee, like a good man do thou keep for the poor, not thinking much to give something of a little. Do not thou prefer thine own profit before the common danger.” 1 “ Thou sayest thou art rich and wealthy,” saith St. Cyprian, “ and thinkest thou must use those things which God would have thee to possess; use them but to saving things, use them but to good acts, use them to those things which God hath commanded, which the Lord hath discovered; let the poor perceive thee to be rich, let the needy perceive thee to be wealthy.” But it would be an endless thing to heap up the several passages we meet with in the fathers to this purpose; I shall add only that excellent notion of St. Chrys- ostoine : m “ Why therefore dost thou deprive thyself of 5 Nunquam denique, fratres cha- rissimi, admonitio divina cessavit, nunquam tacuit, quo minus in scrip- turis sanctis tam veteribus quam novis, semper et ubique ad miseri- cordiae opera Dei populus provoca- retur; et canente atque exhortante Spiritu S., quisquis ad spem regni caelestis instruitur, facere eleemo- synas juberetur. Cyprian, serm. I. de eleemosyna, [p. 198.] k TLevrjs el ; dXX’ dXXov e%eis ttciv- rco? nevecyrepov' - pcov, to aov TvepiTTov enavdcrcocrov npbs tov evberj, p,r) OKvijcros ex. tov oXlyov dovvcu’ pr] 7 rpoTipr] (T V^ T ° crvpfpepov ex tov xoivov xivbvvov. Basil, de eleemosyna, cone. 4. [p. 467. vol. III.] 1 Locupletem te esse dicis et divi- tem, et utendum te putas esse iis, quae possidere te Deus voluit: utere, sed ad res salutares, utere, sed ad bonas artes, utere, ad ilia quae Deus praecepit, quae Dominus os- tendit. Divitem te sentiant pau- peres, locupletem sentiant indigen- tes. Cyprian, de hab. virgin, tract. IL [P-97-] m Tt Toivvv dnocrTepels crecivTov cov civtos ae fiovXeTcu xvpiov elveu ; dia r r 2 612 Of Christian Men's Goods , fyc. Art. XXXVIII. those things whereof God would have thee to be the master l For for this cause he commanded thee to give of thy riches to another, that thou thyself mightest have them; for so long as thou keepest them thyself, not so much as thyself hast them, but when thou givest them to another, then thyself receivest them. 11 And therefore I conclude, that though Christian men’s goods be not common, yet they ought to be communicated to one another. tovto yap croi eiceXevcrev avra ftovvai erepco, iva av avra t'xijs' ecos pev yap povos Karevas, ov8e avros e^ei?. 01 av 8e ere pa 8a s, Tore Kal avros eXafies. Chrysost, in Rom. hom. 7 . [p. 5 1 , 25. vol. III.] ARTICLE XXXIX. OF A CHRISTIAN MAN’S OATH. As we confess that vain and rash swearing is forbid¬ den Christian men by our Lord Jesus Christ , and James his apostle , so we judge, that Christian reli¬ gion doth not prohibit, but that a man may swear when the magistrate requireth, in a cause of faith and charity, so it be done according to the prophet's teaching, in justice, judgment, and truth . a A N oath being nothing else but the calling upon God to JTjL witness the truth of what we say, a rash or a vain oath must needs be nothing else than the taking the name of God rashly, and in vain; and therefore our Saviour, who came not to destroy, but to fulfil the law, commands us not to trans¬ gress, but to obey the law, saying, Swear not at all, Matt. v. 34; and the apostle James, writing after his Master's copy, Swear not, neither by heaven, neither by earth, neither by any other oath, James v. 12. In which places though to swear lawfully is permitted, yet to swear rashly is altogether prohi¬ bited. A sin which there being neither pleasure nor profit in, one should think man might easily be persuaded from; but so corrupt is the heart of man, that I am confident the only reason so many indulge themselves in it, is only because it is a sin. Had God commanded it, we should have been natu- a YloOev ovv €7rei(rr)\6ev 6 opicos; ore ra nana rjv£r]3r],OT€ navra opov avio Kcii Kano yeyovev, ore npos eldooXo- Xarpelav aneicXivaV Tore dr], Tore, ore amiTTOi Xoinov t(f)aivovTO, tov 0e6i> (KaXovv p.apTvpov, & Gods of gold and gods of silver, Exod. xx. 23, the Chaldee para¬ phrase hath it I^mi ppm pm arm. And so is mostly used for false gods. V. Hos. viii. 6. 616 Of a Christian Maris Oath . Art. Moses sware on that day , Jos. xiv. 9; And Saul sware , As the Lord liveth , he shall not be slain , 1 Sam. xix. 6; And David sware unto Said , ch. xxiv. 22; Then king Solomon sware by the Lord , 1 Kings ii. 23. And as they sware themselves, so they required others to swear too. And I will make thee swear by the Lord , saith Abraham to his servant, Gen. xxiv. 3; And Jacob said unto Joseph, Swear unto me; and he sware unto him , Gen. xlvii. 31. Yea God himself is often in scripture said to swear: By myself ham I sworn , saith the Lord , Gen. xxii. 16 ; For when God made promise to Abraham , because he could swear by no greater , he sware by himself ’ Heb. vi. 13 ; Behold , I have sworn by my great name, saith the Lord , Jer. xliv. 26 ; The Lord hath sworn by his holiness , Amos iv. 2; and, The Jjord hath sworn in truth unto David; he will not turn from it , Ps. cxxxii. 11. And certainly what God himself doth cannot be unlawful in itself to be done. And hence it is also that there are rules set down to be observed in our swearing, And thou shalt swear , The Lord liveth , in truth , in righteousness , and in judgment , Jer. iv. 2: in truth, so as not to swear falsely; in righteous¬ ness, so as not to swear unjustly; and in judgment or discre¬ tion, so as not to swear ignorantly. But if it were a sin in itself to swear, it would be in vain to prescribe rules to be observed in swearing; nay, seeing there are rules thus pre¬ scribed to be observed in swearing, it thence follows that it is no sin in itself to swear. Against this cloud of witnesses which this truth is thus encompassed about withal, its adversaries have nothing to plead, but that our Saviour and the apostle James, as we saw even now, said expressly, Swear not at all; from whence they conclude, that though it was lawful under the law, it is now sinful under the new testament, not considering what our Saviour expressly avoucheth in the beginning of the said sermon, Think not that I am come to destroy the lave, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. Matt. v. 17; though he came to destroy the judicial and ceremonial, yet he came not to destroy the moral law. Now it is plain that this law about oaths doth not belong to the ceremonial or judicial law, which he came to destroy, but only to the moral law, which lie came to fulfil; and therefore whatsoever interpre- XXXIX. Of a Christian Man's Oath. 617 tation we put upon these words, Sicear not at all , we must be sure not to make our Saviour to contradict himself, and say he came to destroy the moral law, when himself expressly saith he came to fulfil it. And therefore, when he saith, Swear not at all , we must not so understand it as if he forbad all manner of swearing, but swearing after that manner which the Jews had brought up among themselves, even to swear by the creature as well as by the Creator, by the heavens, where God dwells, as well as by that God that dwells in the heavens, and the like ; and e never to think themselves obliged to per¬ form what they had so sworn to do. And it was these false glosses upon the law which our Saviour strikes at in these words, as we may see plainly by what follows ; Swear not at all; neither by heaven ; for it is God's throne: nor by the earth; for it is his footstool , Matt. v. 34, 35 : so that it was swearing by heaven, and swearing by earth, and swearing by other creatures, which Christ here commands us to abstain from. Or, howsoever, it is manifest that it is common swearing he here aims at, as appears from what follows ; But let your com¬ munication, or common discourse, be, Yea , yea ; and Nay , nay , v. 37: f so that it was in our common discourse that he here commands us not to swear at all; not at all forbidding us to swear upon necessary and urgent occasions. But that our Saviour doth not forbid all manner of swearing when he commands us not to swear at all , is plain also from e Q,uaeri autem potest, cum dice- retur. Ego autem dico vobis, Non ju- rare omnino, cur additum sit, neque per ccelum, quia thronus Dei est j et caetera usque ad id quod dictum est, neque per caput tuum? Credo prop- terea, quia non putabant Judaei se teneri jurejurando, si per ista juras- sent; et cum audierant, Reddes autem Domino jusjurandum tuum ; non se putabant Domino debere jus¬ jurandum, si per caelum aut terram, aut per Hierosolymam, aut per caput suum jurarent; quod non vitio prae- cipientis, sed illis male intelligenti- bus, factum est. Itaque Dominus docet nihil esse tam vile in creaturis Dei, ut per hoc quisquam perjuran- dum arbitretur. Aug. de serm. in monte, 1. i. [52. par. ii. vol. III.] f Ita ergo intelligitur praecepisse Dominum ne juretur, ne quisquam sicut bonum appetat jusjurandum, et assiduitate jurandi ad perjurium per consuetudinem delabatur. Aug. Ibid. [51.] Lex poenam posuerat perjurio, ut fraudulentiam mentium sacramenti religio contineret, simul- que plebs rudis atque insolens fre- quentem de Deo suo mentionem haberet familiaritate jurandi. Fides vero sacramenti consuetudinem re- movet, simplicitatem loquendi audi- endique praescribens. Hilar, in loc. [p. 627.] 618 Of a Christian Man's Oath. Art. the practice and example of the apostle St. Paul. For that St. Paul understood the meaning of our Saviour in these words better than any one doth or can in these days, I hope there is none as yet so sottishly ignorant and so highly pre¬ sumptuous as to deny, s Yet we find him often swearing, and calling upon God to witness what he saith : For God is my record, saith he, how greatly I long after you all , Phil. i. 8 : I say the truth in God, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost , Pom. ix. 1 : The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who is blessed for evermore, knoweth that 1 lie not, 2 Cor. xi. SI : We speak before God in Christ , ch. xii. 19 : The things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not. Gal. i. 20 : As the truth of Christ is in me, no man shall stop me of this boasting, 2 Cor. xi. 10. Nay, it is observable, though himself takes notice of that expression, Yea, yea ; and Nay, nay, which our Saviour commanded us always to use, 2 Cor. i. 17, yet in the very next words he saith, But as God is true, ver. 18; and presently, Moreover I call God for a accord upon my soul, that to spare you I came not as yet to Corinth, ver. 21 : so that it is impossible any one should swear more plainly than he did; yet who dare say he durst have sworn if our Saviour had expressly forbidden all manner of swearing. To which we may also add, that not only St. Paul, but the angel, sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, Rev. x. ; and St. Paul himself also saith, For men verily swear by the greater ; and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife , Heb. vi. 1 6 . For men , not men of this world only, not Jews only, not Gentiles only, but men in general, swear s Sed tamen quoniam jurat qui adhibet testem Deum, consideran- dum est hoc capitulum, ne contra prseceptum Domini apostolus dixisse videatur, qui ssepe hoc modo juravit, cum dicit, Qua autern scribo vobis, ecce coram Deo, quod non mentior j et iterum, Deus et Pater Domini nostri Jesu Christi, qui est benedictus in sacula, scit quod non mentior j tale est illud, Testis enim mihi est Deus, cui servio in spiritu meo in evangelio Filii ejus, quoniam sine in- termissione memoriam vestri facio semper in orationibus meis. Nisi forte quis dicat tunc cavendam esse jurationem, cum per aliquod dicitur quod juratur ; ut non juraverit, qui non dixerit, per Deum; sed dixit, Testis est mihi Deus j ridiculum est hoc putare, tamen propter conten- tiosos aut multum tardiores, ne ali- quid interesse quis putet, sciat etiam hoc modo jurasse apostolum dicen- tem, Quotidie morior, per vestram gloriam, i Cor. xv. Aug. de serm. Dei in monte, 1 . i. [51. par. ii. vol. III.] XXXIX. Of a Christian Mari's Oath. 619 by the greater ; for one sort of men is not here opposed to an¬ other, but men in general to God; neither doth he reprove them for it, but commends it, as that which is the end of all strife. So full, so clear is scripture, both in precepts and precedents, to assure us that it is as lawful to swear in itself, as it is sinful to swear in vain. Neither doth scripture only, but reason also, proclaim this doctrine for a truth. For, first, that which is part of God’s honour must needs be lawful; but now to swear lawfully is part of his honour, and therefore is serving God and swearing by his name joined together, Deut. vi. 19 ; indeed, from swear¬ ing by his name lawfully, according to his will, there is much honour redounding to him, for hereby we acknowledge him to be an all-seeing God, who seeth what I think, as well as men hear what I speak. Hereby we acknowledge him to be a God that loveth justice and truth, and will severely revenge all such as take his name in vain; so that to deny this truth is to rob God of a great part of his honour. Secondly, if we consider the nature of a lawful oath, we shall easily see that it is lawful to take an oath ; for a lawful oath is nothing but a calling upon God to witness what is true. Now to call upon God is no sin; and to call upon God to do good, even to defend the truth, by bearing witness to it, cannot possibly be accounted any sin, there being no law transgressed by it. Lastly, to this we may also add, that an oath is the end of strife; and so the end of an oath is to be the end of strife, and to establish peace and equity betwixt man and man : and so the end of it cannot possibly but be acknowledged as lawful in its nature; and seeing the nature and end of it is lawful, itself cannot be sinful, but a man may swear when the magistrate requireth him, and not sin ; nay, but rather sin if he doth not swear, in not obeying the magistrate in such things which he may lawfully do. And if we consult the fathers we shall find them indeed much inveighing against rash and vain swearing : as St.Chrys- ostome; h “Let us now,” saith he, u set ourselves daily laws; h Qcopev Toivvv iavrois vopovs noXvopKiav tov crToparos, ^aXi vov Kcidrjpepivovs’ re cos ano tcov cvkoXcov emdcopev rrj yXdoTTrj, ppdels opwrco dp^copcOa' nepiKoyj/'Copev rjpcov rrjv tov Qfdv' ovk ear'iv ivravOa dandvr], 620 Of a Christian Man’s Oath. Art. and in the mean while let us begin from those things that are the easiest. Let us cut off the evil custom of swearing from our mouths; let us put a bridle to our tongue; let no one swear by God: here is no charges, here is no labour, here is no care of time required; it sufficeth that he be but willing, and all is done; it is merely a business of custom: I beseech you and entreat you therefore let us set upon this study.” And presently; “ 1 With a loud and a clear voice I speak to all, and witness, that those that are guilty of this sin, those that speak things that are of evil, (for so is such swearing,) that they come not over the church threshold.” And again; k “ Fast, and pray to God, and we with you, that he would take from amongst us this pernicious custom.” And St. Au¬ gustin, prescribing rules for an upright conversation, puts this amongst the rest; 1 “ Altogether shun the custom of swearing, for in this you go much contrary to the commands of God.” And many such like expressions we meet with in the fathers, especially in Tertullian, Basil, Chrysostome, and Athanasius. But howsoever, though they did so much condemn vain and rash swearing, yet they accounted swearing as a thing in itself lawful. For the sixth general council, commonly called the Trullan council, decreed, m “ Those that swear the oaths of the gentiles, the canon punisheth, and we decree them to be excommunicated.” They punished such as took the sinful oaths of the gentiles by their false gods, not such as sware the lawful oaths of the Christians by the true God; and seeing they punished them and not these, it follows that ovk ecrrlv ivravSa Kaparos, ovk £rj KrjpvTTo) Tracri Kal diapapTvpopai, otl tovs ttjv Tvapafiaaiv Tavr-qv embeiKw- pevovs, tovs tcl £k tov Trovr/pov (pBey- yopevovs ( tovto yap £cttlv 6 upKos) tcov ov8wv prj em^aiveLv eKKXrjcnaaTi- KCOV. Ibid. [p. 655, 8.] k 'NrjaTeveTe, napaKaXecraTe tov Qeov, Kal fjpels pe6 ’ vpcov, cocrTe ttjv oXeOpiov TavTTjv e^eXelv crvvrjdeiav. Ibid. [28.] 1 Jurandi consuetudinem funditus evitate; quia valde praeceptis in hac parte contraitis. Aug. de rectitud. cathol. convers. [18. p. 273. App. vol. VI.] m Tous 1 opvvovTas opKovs 'FXXrjvi- kovs 6 Kavcov enLTipioiS Ka6v7To[3aX- Xei’ Kal rjpels tovtols tov acpoptapov opi^opev. Concil. Trul. can. 94. [p. 1693. vol. III. cone. Hard.] XXXIX. Of a Christian Man's Oath. 621 they acknowledged these to be lawful, but condemned them only to be sinful. And St. Gregory saith, n 44 Let therefore every one be wary before he swears, that he may either not swear at all, or that he do not swear to do any evil things.” So that a man may swear, but he must have a care how he swears; he may swear, but to do good, not evil. And Cyril of Alexandria; ° 44 Let yea and nay, amongst those that have chosen to live the best life, have the use and force of an oath, and let things be so confirmed; for it will follow that we ought so also to be believed: but if yea and nay be despised by any, let the use of oaths be at last turned or directed to that which is greater than us, yea, and every creature, viz. the Deity; so that when bare asseverations will not do, confirma¬ tion by oaths may be allowed of.” St. Augustin hath many things to this purpose : p 44 It is much safer,” saith he, 44 as I said, that as much as we can we never swear; that our com¬ munication be Yea , yea , Nay, nay , as our Saviour ad- monisheth: not because it is a sin to swear what is true, but because it is a most grievous sin to swear what is false so that to swear in itself is no sin, for a man may swear, and not sin. And again; 9 44 Wherefore he that understandeth that swearing is to be reckoned not amongst the good but the necessary things, refraineth as much as he can, so as not to use it but upon necessity, when he seeth men slow to be¬ lieve what is profitable for them to believe, unless they be n Sit ergo unusquisque cautus, antequam juret, ut aut ne omnino juret, aut facturum se mala non juret. Greg. mag. in i Reg. c. 14. expos. 1. 5. [c. iv. 57. p. 328. par. ii. vol. III.] 0 v E(rra) rocyapovv to ml, kcu to ov, Tvapa ye toIs dpicrTa (3iovv pprj- pevois, opKov XP eLCL Te Kai Svvapis, kcu bLcnreTvrjxOoi opdcos' e\j/€Tcu yap ovtco Kal to mcrTevecrdai 8elv‘ el 8e aTipa^oiTO 7rpos tivos to vcu kcll to OX), TOiV OpKCOV f) XP ela TeTpd(f)0(O \oi~ TTov eir\ to pel£ov r) Kaff rjpas, pak- kov rj kutci Tvdcrav ktlctlv. Cyril. Alex, de adorat. in spirit, et verit. 1. 6. [p. 214. vol. I.] p Multo enim tutius, ut dixi. quantum ad nos attinet, nunquam juremus, ut sit in ore nostro, est est, non non , sicut Dominus monet; non quia peccatum est, verum jurare; sed quia gravissimum peccatum est falsum jurare; quo citius cadit, qui consuevit jurare. Aug. epist. ad Hilar. [157. vol. II.] 633. Hermas. Pastor : inter Opera Patrum Apostol. q. v. Hesychius, presb. Hierosol. In Le- viticurn libri septem. fol. Basil. 1527. Hieronymus. Opera, studio Villarsii. ii voll. fol. Veron. 1734-1742. Hiearius. Ed- Bened. fol. Par. 1693. Hincmarus, archiep. Remensis. Ope¬ ra, cura Sirmondi. 2 voll. fol. Par. 1645. Histor. eccles. Gr. Lat. cura H. Va- lesii et G. Reading. 3 voll. fol. Can- tab. 1720. Historia Ecclesiastica Magdeb. 8 voll. fol. Basil. 1560-1574. Hugo de Sancto Victore, q. v. Humbertus de Sylva Candida, episc. Contra Graecorum calumnias: vol. xvni. Max. Bibl. Patr. q. v. Jacobus I. Anglia? rex. His works, fol. Bond. 1616. Ignatius. Epistolae, ed. Usserii, 4to. Oxon. 1644. -- ed. Vossii. 4to. Amstel. 1646. Indulgent 1 arum Catalogus 7 eccle- siarum Romae ; transl. by Will. Cra- shaw, q. v. Innocentius III. papa. De s. altaris mysterio. 8vo. Antv. 1550. Joannes Sarisburiensis. Epistola?. qto. Par. t6i 1. Jo bus, monachus. De verb! incarna- tione. p. 578. Photii Myriobiblon, q. v. Josephus, (Flav.) Opera; ed. Hudson. Gr. Lat. fol. Oxon. 1720. Iren.eus. Contra haereses; ed. Bened. fol. Par. 1710. Isidorus, Hispal. Opera, fol. Par. 1601. Isidorus, Pelusiota. Epistolarum libri quinque. fol. Par. 1638. Juchasin, Liber; auctore R. Abrah. Zacuth , q. v. Juellus, (Jo.) episc. Sarisb. Opera, fol. Genev. 1585. Ivo, Carnotensis episc. Decretum : the¬ saurus eccl. disciplinae. fol. Lovan. 1561. J uniliu s, episc. Africanus. In Genes, comm. vol. vi. S. Bibl. Patr. Par. 1575? q- v. Justellus, (H.) Biblioth. juris Can. vet. q. v. Jus Graeco-Romanum canon, et civ. cura Leunclavii. 2 voll. fol. Francof. 1596. Justinus Martyr. Opera, fol. Par. 1742. Justinianus, (Bened.) esoc. Jesu. In omnes Pauli epistt. 2 voll. fol. Lugd. 1613. Justintanus, Imperator. Authent. s. Novell ib ; Gr. Lat. fol. Antv. 1575. Lactantius, ed. Dufresnoy. 2 voll. 4to. Lut. Par. 1748. Ljetus, (Pomponius.) Roman* hist, compendium ; apud Romance s. Au¬ gust* hist, scriptores minores, q. v. Lambf.rtus, Schafnaburgensis. Ger- manorum res gestae. 8vo. Tubin. > 5 33 - Lanfranc, archiep. Cantuar. Contra Berengarium ; apud H. Petri M ucpo- TrpeafivTiKuv, q. v. Laurentius, Barrensis. Historia Christiana veterum patrum. fol. Par. J 5 8 3 - I.aymannus, (Paulus) e soc. Jesu. Theologia moralis. 2 voll. 4to. Mo- nachii, 1625. Leo I. Magnus, papa. Opera omnia, cum notis Quesnellii. 2 voll. 4to. Lut. Par. 1675. -Epistola ad Flavianum ; p. 144. Miscell. sanctorum aliquot patr., auct. Vossio, q. v. Leo X. papa. Decret. ; apud M. Lu- theri Op. q. v. Leontius, Byzantinus. De seeds. 8vo. Basil. 1578. INDEX OF AUTHORS. 631 Lindanus, (Wilhelrnus) i. e. Willi. Dumasus Lindanus, q. v. Liturgi^e antiq. viz. Chrysost., Basil., Marc., Petri, &c. vol. n. Bibl. vet. Patr. fol. Par. 1624, q. v. Lombardus, (P.) Sententiarum libri. 8vo. Par. 1564. Lucretius ; ed. Creech. 8vo. Oxon. 1807. Lutherus, (Mart.) Opera. 7 voll. fol. Witteb. 1550-7. Lyra, (Nic. de) Biblia; cum glossa ord. 6 voll. fol. Lugd. 1589. Macarius, ASgyptius. Homiliae; ed. J. Geo. Pritio. 8vo. Lips. 1698. Maimonides, (R. Moses) Comm, in Mishn. fol. Ven. 1606. -De fundamentis legis. Hebr. Lat. per Vorstium. 4to. Amst. 1638. -nptn T>. 2 voll. fol. Ven. 1 5 S°? i- Marcus, eremita. Opera; vol. 1. Bibl. vet. Patr. fol. Par. 1624. q. v. Maronitarum, (Officium septem die- rum hebdomadae, juxta usum eccle- siae.) 8 vo. Romae, 1647. Mauritius, (Petrus) abbas Clunia- censis. Contra haereticos Petrobru- sianos. 4to. Ingolst. 1546. Maxentius, (Joan.) presb. Antioch. vol. ix. Max. Bibl. Patr. q. v. Maximus, Taurinensis episc.; inter Hept. praesul. Christ, q. v. Mediavilla, (Richardus de.) Super quatuor libros Sententiarum P. Lomb. 4 voll. fol. Brix. 1591. Microt.ogus, (Joan.) De eccles. ob- servationibus; vol. xvm. Max. Bibl. Patr. q. v. Midrash Tehillim ; "^nn ffino : ex- ercitatio in Psal. magna. fol. Ven. 1546. MIKPOnPESBTTIKON : cura H. Petri, q. v. Monte, (Robertus de.) Append, ad Chronogr. Sigeberti; vol. 1. Scripto- rum rerum German. Jo. Pistorii, q. v. Nathan, (R.) ben Jechiel. “fnrn D Aruch; lex. Talmudicum. fol. Ven. 1653* Navarrus, (Mart.) Azpilcueta , q. v. Nicetas Acominatus Choniat. Imperii Graeci Historia: Gr. Lat. a Wolfio. 4to. Genev. 1593. --Thesaurus orthodoxae fidei; P. Morello interpr. 8vo. Lut. 1580. Nicephorus Callistus. Hist. eccl. Gr. Lat. cum interpr. J. Langii. 2 voll. fol. Par. 1630. Nilus, monachus. Capita paraenetiea ; vol. vii. Max. Bibl. Patr. q. v. Odo, episc. Cameracensis. Explicatio s. canonis missae; vol. xxi. Max. Bibl. Patr. q. v. (Ecumenius. Commentt. in N. T. Gr. Lat. 2 voll. fol. Par. 1631. Olympiodorus, monachus. In eccle- siast.; apud Monum. patr. orthodox, ed. Grynceo , q. v. Optatus, Milevitanus episc. Opera, fol. Par. 1679. Origenes. Opera; ed. Bened. 4 voll. fol. Par. 1733-59. -Op. fol. Par. 1604. Orphei Carmina; ed. Hermanno. 8vo. Lips. 1805. Pacianus, Barcil. episc. Epistolae 3 ad Sympr. vol. iv. Max. Bibl. Patr. q.v. Palude, (Petrus de.) In quartum Sen¬ tentiarum. fol. Panigarol, vel Panicarola, (Franc.) episc. Hastens. Disceptationes Cal- vinicae. 4to. Mediol. 1594. Parez, (Jacob.) de Valentia. Exposi- tiones in Psal. Cant. &c. fol. Par. 1518. Paris, (Matthaeus) Anglus. Historia major; ed. W. Watts, fol. Loud. 1640. Paschasius. De corpore et sang. Do¬ mini. 8vo. Colon. 1550. Patres apostolici: ed. Cotelerii. fol. Lut. Par. 1672. Pat rum, (Bibl. veterum). 3 voll. fol. Par. 1624. Pat rum (S. Bibliotheca), 8 voll. fol. Par. 1575. -Append. Bibl. fol. Par. 1579 * Patrum, (Maxima Bibliotheca.) 28 voll. fol. Lugd. 1677. Pau linus, episc. vol. vi. Max. Bibl. Patr. q. v. Paulus, diaconus. De gestis Lango- bardorum; vol.xin. Max. Bibl. Patr. q. v. Pelegrinus, archiep. Laureac. vol. xvii. Max. Bibl. Patr. q. v. Pelusiota, i. e. Isidorus Pel q. v.. Petri, (H.) MiKpo-irpea^vriKSu: Vete¬ rum brev. theol. elenchus. fol. Basil. 155°. Petrus Mauritius , Cluniacensis ab¬ bas, q. v. Philastrius, episc. Brixiensis. Hae- resium catalogus. 4to. Helmst. 1611. Philo, Judaeus. Opera; ed. Mangey. 2 voll. fol. Lend. 1742. 632 INDEX OF AUTHORS. Phocylides: ed.Bandinio. Hvo. Flor. 1766. Phot 1 us, patriar. Constantinop. De septem cec. synod, p. 1141. Bitd. jur. Can. vet. q. v.; et, p. 263. ed. 4to. Far. 1615. -Myriobiblon, sen Bibliotheca. fol. Par. 1611. Pindari Carmina ; ed. Heyne. 3 voll. 8vo. Lips. 1817. Pistoriits, (Joan.) Scriptores rerum German. 2 voll. fol. Francof. 1683,4. PiTHtEUS, (Petr.) Opera. 4to. Par. 16og. Platina. De vitis pontif. Rom. fol. Lovan. 1572; et, Colon. Ub. 1600. Plinius, (C.) Secundus. Hist. nat.; interpr. et not. Harduini. 5 voll. 4to. Par. 1685. Plutarchi Opera; ed. Wyttenbach. 8 voll. 4to. Oxon. e typog. Clar. i795-«83o. Poeuve Gr. vet. heroici carm. fol. Au- rel. Allobr. 1606. Polycarpus. Epist. ad Philipp, cum Ignatii Epistt. q. v. Primasius, Uticensis episc. In S.Pauli epistolas comm 8vo. Par. 1543. Prosper, Aquitanicus. Opera. 8vo. Col. Agrip. 1609; et, p. 887. Cas- siani Op. 1628; et, p. 170. App. vol. x. Augustmi Op. q. v. Prudent 1 us, (Aur.) Opera. 2 voll. qto. Parm. 1788. Rabanus Maurus. Opera. 6 voll. fol. Colon. Agr. 1626. Raynaldus, (Od.) Continuatio An- nal. eccles. Baronii , q. v. Regino, (vel Rhegino,) abbas. An- nales; p. 1. vol. 1. Pislorii Scriptt. rer. Germ. q. v. Remigius, episc. vol. vm. Max. Bibl. Patr. q. v. Robertus de Monte , q. v. Romasus, (Franeiscus.) De libertate operum et necessitate. 4to. Romance, s. Augustaj historiae Scrip- tores minores ; cura Sylburgii. 3 voll. fol. Francof. 1588. Ruefinus. Expos, in symbol, ad calc. Cypriani , cura Fell, p. 1 7. q. v. -Praef. ad libr. Recognitio- num dementis Rom. q. v. Rupert us, abbas Tuitiensis. Opera. 2 voll. fol. Col. Agr. 1602. Salmeron, (Alfonsus.) Commentarii in epist. Paul. 4 voll. 4to. Col. Agr. 1604. Salvianus, Massiliens. pres. De gu- bernatione Dei, &c. 8vo. Oxon. 1633. Sancto Victore, (Hugo de.) Spe¬ culum de mysteriis ecclesiae; p. 148. vol. hi. Opp. fol. Ven. 1588. Saviee, (sir Henry.) Rerum Anyl. scriptores, &c. q. v. Scot us, (Jo. Duns.) In libr. Senten- tiarum Reportata Petri Tatareti, q.v. Sedulius, presb. In epistt. Pauli Collectaneum. fol. Basil. 1528. Seneca, (Luc. et Marc.) Opera. 3 voll. 8vo. Amst. 1672. et, 5 voll. ed. Bi- pont. 8vo. Argent. 1810. SibY elina orac. vol. 111. Bibl. vet. Patr . q. v. Sidonius, (C. Sollius) Apoll. Arvern. episc. Epistolae ; vol. 1. Sirmondi Op. q. v. Sigebertus, Gemblacensis. Chroni- con ; p.401. Hist. Christianae vet. pat. Laurentii Barrens, q. v. -Chronographia ; vol. 1. Scriptt. rerum Germ, per Pistorium , q.v. Sirmon dus, (Jac. ) Concilia antiq. Galliae, q. v. Opera. 5 voll. fol. Par. 1696. Socrates, Byzantinus. Hist, eccles., apud Hist. Eccles. Gr. Lat. Vales, et Reading, q. v. Sophocles. Tragoed. ed. Dindorhi. 8vo. Oxon. 1832. Soto, (Dominicus) Segobicus. De 11a- tura et gratia, fol. Antv. 1550. Soto, (Petrus de.) Lectiones de institu- tione sacerdotum. 8vo. Lugd. 1587. Sozomen, Salaminius. Hist, eccl., apud Hist. Eccles. Gr. Lat. Vales, et Reading, q. v. Sparrow, (Anth.) Collection of Ar¬ ticles, Injunctions, &c. 4to. Loud. 1675. Stapleton, (Thomas.) Promptuarium catholicum. 8vo. Par. 1617. Strabo, (Walafridus) abbas. De ex- ordiis et incr. rerum eccl. 8vo. Ven. 1572 . Suarez, (Franc.) e soc. Jesu. Comm, in hi. partem Thoraae. 4 voll. fol. Compl. 1590. Synod is, (Anonymi liber de sex oec.) p. 1161. Photii, apud Bibl. jur. Can. vet. q. v. Talmud Babyl. 10 voll. fol. Ven. 1522. Talmud Hierosol. fol. Ven. T at are T us, s. Tartaretus, (Petrus.) Reportata in Sententias Jo. Duns Scoti. fol. Ven. 1607. Tatianus, Syrus. Oratio ad Graecos; Gr. Lat. ed. Worth, qto. Oxon. 1700. Tertullianus, Carthag. presb. ed. INDEX OF AUTHORS. 633 Semler. 6 voll. 8vo. Halae, 1825-8. ; et, 5 voll. fol. Rothom. 1662. Theodoretus. Opera ; ed. Sirmondi. 5 voll. fol. Par. 1642-84. Theodorus, Lector. Libri Collect, inter Scriptt. Hist. Eccles. Vales, et Reading, q. v. Theophanes. Chronographia; ex rec. Combefis. fol. Par. 1655. Theophilus, Alex, archiep. Edicta etcanones: vol.11. Beveregii Synod, q.v. Theophilus, Antioch, episc. Libri tres ad Autolychnm, Gr. Lat. ed. Wolfio. 8vo. Hamb. 1724. Theophylactus. In qnat. evang. fol. Par. 1631. -In Act. apost. Gr. Lat. fol. Col. 1568. -In Pauli epistt. fol. Lond. 1636. Thucydides. Gr. ed. Poppo. 8 vo. Lips. 1825, &c. Turrecremata, (Joan, de.) Quae- stiones super evangeliis. 8vo. Lugd. 1509. Urstisius, (Ch.) Germanise historici illustres. fol. Francof. 1585. Usserius, (J.) archiep. Armach. De ecclesiarum successione et statu ; edit, sec. fol. Lond. 1687. .-De Romanae ecclesiae symbolo diatriba. 4to. Oxon. 1660. Valentia, (Gregorius de.) De rebus fidei controversis. fol. Lugd. 1591. Venantius Honorius Clementianus Fortunatns, episc. Pictav. q. v. Vergiliu s,( Polydore.) Anglise historiae libri 27. fol. Bas. 1570. -De rerum inventione. 8vo. Lugd. Bat. 1644. Victorinus, (Cl. Marius.) Commentt. in Genes. 8vo. Par. 1560. Vincent ius, Burgundus, praesul Bel- lovacensis. Speculum historiale, iv. vol. Spec. maj. fol. Ven. 1591. Vincent 1 us, Lirinensis. Commoni- torium adv. haei-es. 8vo. Oxon. 1631. Vossius, (Gerard.) Borchlonius. Mis¬ cellanea sane, aliquot patrum Graeco¬ rum et Lat. 4 to. Mog. 1604. Walafridus Strabo, abbas; v. W. Strabo. Westjionasteriensis, (Matthaeus.) Flores historiarum praecip. de rebus Brit. fol. Francof. 1601. Wilkins, (Dav.) Concilia Magnae Brit, et Hib. q. v. Xenophanes, Colophonius; inter poet, ed. Steph. 8vo. Par. 1573. Zacharias, episc. Chrysopol. De Con¬ cordia evangelistarum libr. quat. fol. I 53 S- Zacuth, (R. Abraham.) Juchasin. qto. Cracov. 1581. Zephyrus, (Fr.) Catena locorum in Pent. 8vo. Col. Agr. 1572. The Citations from the Fathers as made by Bp. Beveridge having been found to vary considerably from the Editions above stated , it has been deemed expedient to subjoin a collation of these Editions with the MS. of Bp. Beveridge. The lines are reckoned from the bottom. MS. Pag. lin. 7. 15. qua summa 7. 20. ra radra rod 7. 13. a\y on dyevrjroL re kcu ye- V1)To\, OV% O/JLOLOl 8. 6 . Virtutis autem perfecta na- tura non potest esse nisi in eo in quo totum est, non in eo in quo pars 35. 7. Apostolus mentiri seipsum non potest; quoniam multa non potest. 35. 16. faciat ut ea quae vera sunt, eo ipso quod vera sunt, falsa sint. 54. 3. kcu rrjv bcavopr^v 54. Ult. KOCTfJLOV 57. 19. pevpan 63. 4. vidi 65. 23. et tres 69. 3. nec distincte tria 70. 13. in natura unus est 70. 17. et simul omnes una sub¬ stantia 70. 13. Ita etiam quicquid est Filius in eo quod Deus est 70. 7. hoc Pater 75. 27. nemo novit; non haeretici omnes, neque angeli ED. qua summum Anselm, p. 85. ret Travra rod Athanas. I. 6. dXA.’ on ayevrjroL ov% op.0101 Athenag. p. 283. Virtutis autem perfectior natura po¬ test esse in eo, in quo totum est, quam in eo, in quo pars Lactan. I. p. 10. Apostolus negare seipsum non po¬ test. Quam multa non potest. August. VI. i. 2. faciat ut ea quae vera sunt, eo ipso quo vera sunt, falsa sint. Aug.W\l. 26. 5. kcu rrjv diapovrjv Chrysost. I. 63. Xpovov marg. Kocrpov Id. ib. vevpan Athanas. 43, 44. vidit Aug. III. ii. et hi tres Cypr. p. 109. nec disjuncte tria Aug. II. p. 609. in una natura unus est. Aug. VI. App. pp. 19. 20. caret, Ale. p. 709. Ita etiam et Filius eo quod Deus est Ale. p. 709. caret, Id. ib. nemo novit; non Valentinus non Marcion neque Saturninus neque Basilides, neque angeli Iren. 1 . 2. COLLATION. 635 76. 4. dicimus de Deo 77. I 9 . KpeiTTCOV e Opovos' elra 6 rrjs ’ Avrio^eojv' Kai pera r. Cone. Trul. c. 36. et si modo velit et si modo possit. Tert. ac puellis. Ib. I